Eficacia del tratamiento ortodóncico con brackets convencionales versus brackets de autoligado. Una revisión sistemática [Efficacy of orthodontic treatment with conventional brackets versus Self-Ligating Brackets. Systematic review]
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.62574/zbv14z32Palabras clave:
ortodoncia, bracket convencional, bracket autoligadoResumen
Objetivo: analizar la eficacia del tratamiento ortodóncico con brackets convencionales versus brackets de autoligado desde una revisión sistemática. Método: La búsqueda se restringió a artículos en inglés, español y portugués publicados desde el año 2014– 2024. Resultados: Los brackets de autoligado han demostrado reducir el tiempo de tratamiento, alineción más eficáz y mayor comodidad al paciente, sin afectar a la estabilidad postratamiento. La elección del sistema debe individualizarse según las necesidades clínicas y biomecánicas de cada caso. Conclusión: En la mayoría de situaciones clínicas, no existen diferencias significativas, excepto en la expresión del torque, a favor de los brackets tradicionales.
Descargas
Referencias
Arteche P, Oberti G, Aristizabal JF, Sierra Á, Rey D. “Consideraciones importantes de la Ortodoncia con brackets de autoligado versus ligado convencional” “Important considerations of Orthodontics with self-ligating brackets versus conventional ligation.” Biblioteca Fundadores Universidad CES. 2015.
Aras I, Unal I, Huniler G, Aras A. Root resorption due to orthodontic treatment using self-ligating and conventional brackets. Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics / Fortschritte der Kieferorthopädie. 2018 May 12;79(3):181–90.
Mateu ME, Benítez-Rogé S, Iglesias M, Calabrese D, Lumi M, Solla M, et al. Increased interpremolar development with self-ligating orthodontics. A prospective randomized clinical trial. Acta Odontol Latinoam. 2018 Aug;31(2):104–9.
Ronald RM, Cristian BZ, Lorenzo PR, Gabriela PS. Tratamiento interdisciplinario de paciente adulto con trastornos de la articulación temporomandibular. reporte de caso. Odontología Activa Revista Científica [Internet]. 2020;5(3):125–30. Available from: https://oactiva.ucacue.edu.ec/index.php/oactiva/article/view/502/612
Ramos Montiel RR. Theoretical epistemic foundation of the maxillofacial cranio-cervico diagnosis Fundamento teórico epistémico del diagnóstico cráneo-cérvico maxilofacial. Rev Mex Ortodon [Internet]. 2022;7(4):180–2. Available from: www.medigraphic.com/ortodoncia
Medina-Abad J, Guerrero-Alvarado D. Tiempo de tratamiento de brackets de autoligado versus ortodoncia convencional: revisión bibliográfica. 593 Digital Publisher CEIT. 2023 May 2;8(3):518–27.
Cruz L, Mayoral V, Torre H, Carrillo Roberto. mo193c. Rev Mex Ortodon. 2019;7.
de Almeida MR, Herrero F, Fattal A, Davoody AR, Nanda R, Uribe F. A comparative anchorage control study between conventional and self-ligating bracket systems using differential moments. Angle Orthod. 2013 Nov;83(6):937–42.
da Costa Monini A, Júnior LGG, Vianna AP, Martins RP. A comparison of lower canine retraction and loss of anchorage between conventional and self-ligating brackets: a single-center randomized split-mouth controlled trial. Clin Oral Investig. 2017 May 31;21(4):1047–53.
Araújo RC, Bichara LM, de Araujo AM, Normando D. Debris and friction of self-ligating and conventional orthodontic brackets after clinical use. Angle Orthod. 2015 Jul 1;85(4):673–7.
Andrea C, Monrroy V, Beatriz J, Astudillo P, Miriam, Ortega López F, et al. Conditioning, bonding, and cementation of orthodontic appliances in teeth with enamel alterations. Literature review. Revista Odontología [Internet]. 2021 Jul 30;23(2):e3443–e3443. Available from: https://revistadigital.uce.edu.ec/index.php/odontologia/article/view/3443
Lazo FJ, Alarcón RT. Brackets autoligados vs convencionales: una revisión basada en 15 años de evidencia. Rev Evid Odontol Clin. 2015;1(1).
Machibya FM, Bao X, Zhao L, Hu M. Treatment time, outcome, and anchorage loss comparisons of self-ligating and conventional brackets. Angle Orthod. 2013 Mar 1;83(2):280–5.
Dehbi H, Azaroual MF, Zaoui F, Halimi A, Benyahia H. Therapeutic efficacy of self-ligating brackets: A systematic review. Int Orthod. 2017 Sep;15(3):297–311.
Lai TT, Chiou JY, Lai TC, Chen T, Wang HY, Li CH, et al. Perceived pain for orthodontic patients with conventional brackets or self-ligating brackets over 1 month period: A single-center, randomized controlled clinical trial. J Formos Med Assoc. 2020 Jan;119(1):282–9.
Dalstra M, Eriksen H, Bergamini C, Melsen B. Actual versus theoretical torsional play in conventional and self-ligating bracket systems. J Orthod. 2015 Jun 14;42(2):103–13.
Yang X, Xue C, He Y, Zhao M, Luo M, Wang P, et al. Transversal changes, space closure, and efficiency of conventional and self-ligating appliances. Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics / Fortschritte der Kieferorthopädie. 2018 Jan 3;79(1):1–10.
Songra G, Clover M, Atack NE, Ewings P, Sherriff M, Sandy JR, et al. Comparative assessment of alignment efficiency and space closure of active and passive self-ligating vs conventional appliances in adolescents: A single-center randomized controlled trial. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2014 May;145(5):569–78.
Pulgarin Fernandez CM, Campoverde Torres CH, Zapata Hidalgo CD, Calderon Barzallo ML, Ramos Montiel RR. Capítulo 5. Estimación tridimensional de la porción condilar en adultos jóvenes con normo-oclusión de la ciudad de Cuenca-Ecuador. Sociedad del Conocimiento: Resultados de investigaciones universitarias. 2023;120–39. Available from: https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=9267386&info=resumen&idioma=ENG
Azucena Y, Mendoza G, Bolívar S, Fernández J, Fernanda M, López O, et al. Deflexión craneal y convexidad facial: Parámetros para identificar clase esqueletal previo tratamiento ortodóntico. South Florida Journal of Development [Internet]. 2022 Jan 21;3(1):596–604. Available from: https://www.southfloridapublishing.com/ojs/index.php/jdev/article/view/1089
Ordoñez Pintado AR, Trelles Méndez JA, Carrión Sarmiento MV, Zapata Hidalgo CD, Ramos Montiel RR. Cephalometric proportionality between the chin and its anterior projection in young Andean adults. Rev Científica Univ Cienfuegos. 2021;13(5):439–44.
Gandini P, Orsi L, Sfondrini MF, Scribante A. Opening and closure forces of sliding mechanisms of different self-ligating brackets. J Appl Oral Sci. 2013 Jun;21(3):231–4.
Pandis N, Bourauel C, Eliades T. Changes in the stiffness of the ligating mechanism in retrieved active self-ligating brackets. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2007 Dec;132(6):834–7.
Nascimento LEAG do, Souza MMG de, Azevedo ARP, Maia LC. Are self-ligating brackets related to less formation of Streptococcus mutans colonies? A systematic review. Dental Press J Orthod. 2014 Jan;19(1):60–8.
Cocios Arpi JF, Trelles Méndez JA, Jinez Zuñiga PA, Zapata Hidalgo CD, Ramos Montiel RR. Correlación cefalométrica del mentón y cuerpo mandibular en adultos jóvenes andinos, año 2019. Rev Dilemas Contemp Educ Política Valores [Internet]. 2021;6. Available from: http://www.scielo.org.mx/scielo.php?pid=S2007-78902021000500056&script=sci_abstract&tlng=en
Bashir R, Sonar S, Batra P, Srivastava A, Singla A. Comparison of transverse maxillary dental arch width changes with self-ligating and conventional brackets in patients requiring premolar extraction – A randomized clinical trial. Int Orthod. 2019 Dec;17(4):687–92.
Arteche P, Oberti G, Aristizabal JF, Sierra Á, Rey D, Arteche P, et al. Consideraciones importantes de la ortodoncia con brackets de autoligado versus ligado convencional. Rev Esp Ortodon [Internet]. 2015. Available from: www.revistadeortodoncia.com
Nascimento LEAG do, Pithon MM, dos Santos RL, Ayres Freitas AO, Sales Alviano D, Nojima LI, et al. Colonization of Streptococcus mutans on esthetic brackets: Self-ligating vs conventional. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2013 Apr;143(4):S72–7.
Rahman S, Spencer RJ, Littlewood SJ, O’Dywer L, Barber SK, Russell JS. A multicenter randomized controlled trial to compare a self-ligating bracket with a conventional bracket in a UK population: Part 2: Pain perception. Angle Orthod. 2016 Jan 1;86(1):149–56.
O’Dywer L, Littlewood SJ, Rahman S, Spencer RJ, Barber SK, Russell JS. A multi-center randomized controlled trial to compare a self-ligating bracket with a conventional bracket in a UK population: Part 1: Treatment efficiency. Angle Orthod. 2016 Jan 1;86(1):142–8.
Atik E, Akarsu-Guven B, Kocadereli I, Ciger S. Evaluation of maxillary arch dimensional and inclination changes with self-ligating and conventional brackets using broad archwires. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2016 Jun;149(6):830–7.
Malik DES, Fida M, Afzal E, Irfan S. Comparison of anchorage loss between conventional and self-ligating brackets during canine retraction – A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int Orthod. 2020 Mar;18(1):41–53.
Zhou Q, ul Haq AAA, Tian L, Chen X, Huang K, Zhou Y. Canine retraction and anchorage loss self-ligating versus conventional brackets: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Oral Health. 2015 Dec 4;15(1):136.
Atik E, Ciğer S. An assessment of conventional and self-ligating brackets in Class I maxillary constriction patients. Angle Orthod. 2014 Jul;84(4):615–22.
Wilches Buitrago L, García A, Quintero L, De Los Reyes A, Otero L. Comparison of the biological response generated by conventional and self-ligating brackets. Univ Odontol. 2014 Sep 8;33(70).
Ramos Montiel RR, Puebla Ramos L, Palmas S, Oyen J, Cabrera Padrón MI, Espinoza Arias J, et al. Biology and Mechanobiology of the Tooth Movement during the Orthodontic Treatment. IntechOpen [Internet]. 2024. Available from: https://www.intechopen.com/online-first/88933
Almeida MR de, Futagami C, Conti AC de CF, Oltramari-Navarro PVP, Navarro R de L. Dentoalveolar mandibular changes with self-ligating versus conventional bracket systems: A CBCT and dental cast study. Dental Press J Orthod. 2015 Jun;20(3):50–7.
da Costa Monini A, Gandini LG, Vianna AP, Martins RP, Jacob HB. Tooth movement rate and anchorage lost during canine retraction: A maxillary and mandibular comparison. Angle Orthod. 2019 Jul 1;89(4):559–65.
Yang X, He Y, Chen T, Zhao M, Yan Y, Wang H, et al. Differences between active and passive self-ligating brackets for orthodontic treatment. Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics / Fortschritte der Kieferorthopädie. 2017 Mar 21;78(2):121–8.
Al-Thomali Y, Mohamed RN, Basha S. Torque expression in self-ligating orthodontic brackets and conventionally ligated brackets: A systematic review. J Clin Exp Dent. 2017.
Publicado
Número
Sección
Licencia
Derechos de autor 2025 Susana Carolina Vaca-Muñoz, Lorenzo Puebla-Ramos (Autor/a)
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial-CompartirIgual 4.0.
CC BY-NC-SA : Esta licencia permite a los reutilizadores distribuir, remezclar, adaptar y construir sobre el material en cualquier medio o formato solo con fines no comerciales, y solo siempre y cuando se dé la atribución al creador. Si remezcla, adapta o construye sobre el material, debe licenciar el material modificado bajo términos idénticos.
