Korean J Orthod.  2024 Jan;54(1):16-25. 10.4041/kjod23.081.

Effectiveness of laser-engineered copper-nickel titanium versus superelastic nickel-titanium aligning archwires: A randomized clinical trial

• Ahmed OK
• Kadhum AS

• KMID: 2551472
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.4041/kjod23.081

Abstract

Objective
To compare the effectiveness of laser-engineered copper-nickel titanium (SmartArch) and superelastic nickel-titanium (SENT) archwires in aligning teeth and inducing root resorption and pain experienced by patients.
Methods
Two-arm parallel groups with a 1:1 allocation ratio were used. The participants were patients aged 11.5 years and older with 5–9 mm of mandibular anterior crowding who were indicated for non-extraction treatment. The primary outcome was alignment effectiveness, assessed using Little’s irregularity index (LII) over 16 weeks with a single wire (0.016-inch) in the SmartArch group and 2 wires (0.014- and 0.018-inch) in the SENT group (8 weeks each). Secondary outcomes included root resorption evaluated by pre- and post-intervention periapical radiographs and pain levels recorded by the participants during the first week. Results: A total of 40 participants were randomly allocated into 2 groups; 33 completed the study and were analyzed (16 in the SmartArch group and 17 in the SENT group, aged 16.97 ± 4.05 years). The total LII decrease for the SmartArch and SENT groups was 5.63 mm and 5.29 mm, respectively, which was neither statistically nor clinically significant. Root resorption was not significantly different between the groups. The difference in pain levels was not statistically significant for the first 5 days following wire placement; however, there was a significant difference favoring the SENT group in the final 2 days.
Conclusions
SmartArch and SENT archwires were similarly effective during the alignment phase of orthodontic treatment. Root resorption should be observed throughout the treatment with either wire. SmartArch wires demonstrated higher pain perception than SENT wires.

Keyword

Alignment; Aligning archwires; Randomized clinical trial

Figure

• 

  Figure 1 Mandibular casts of patients in both groups at each stage of treatment. SENT, superelastic nickel-titanium.

• 

  Figure 2 Occlusal photographs of patients in both groups before treatment and at the end of the trial. SENT, superelastic nickel-titanium.

• 

  Figure 3 CONSORT flowchart of participants through each stage of the trial. CONSORT, Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials; SENT, superelastic nickel-titanium.

Reference

1. Wang Y, Liu C, Jian F, McIntyre GT, Millett DT, Hickman J, et al. 2018; Initial arch wires used in orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 7:CD007859. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD007859.pub4. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007859.pub4. PMID: 30064155.

2. Jian F, Lai W, Furness S, McIntyre GT, Millett DT, Hickman J, et al. 2013; Initial arch wires for tooth alignment during orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013:CD007859. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD007859.pub3. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007859.pub3. PMID: 23633347. PMCID: PMC6465075.

3. Abdelrahman RSh, Al-Nimri KS, Al Maaitah EF. 2015; A clinical comparison of three aligning archwires in terms of alignment efficiency: a prospective clinical trial. Angle Orthod. 85:434–9. https://doi.org/10.2319/041414-274.1. DOI: 10.2319/041414-274.1. PMID: 25090135. PMCID: PMC8612438.

4. Rodrigues PF, Fernandes FMB, Magalhães R, Camacho E, Lopes A, Paula AS, et al. 2020; Thermo-mechanical characterization of NiTi orthodontic archwires with graded actuating forces. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater. 107:103747. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmbbm.2020.103747. DOI: 10.1016/j.jmbbm.2020.103747. PMID: 32279059.

5. Viecilli RF, Burstone CJ. 2015; Ideal orthodontic alignment load relationships based on periodontal ligament stress. Orthod Craniofac Res. 18 Suppl 1:180–6. https://doi.org/10.1111/ocr.12079. DOI: 10.1111/ocr.12079. PMID: 25865547.

6. Abaas HD, Al-Huwaizi AF. 2015; Load-deflection characteristics and force levels of coated nickel titanium orthodontic archwires. J Bagh Coll Dent. 27:154–7. https://www.jbcd.uobaghdad.edu.iq/index.php/jbcd/article/view/728. DOI: 10.12816/0015312.

7. Ormco Corporation. 2019. NEW SMARTARCH Laser Engineered CuNiTi^® brochure [Internet]. Ormco Corporation;Amersfoort: Available from: https://ormco.ie/wp-content/uploads/sites/21/2019/05/Flyer-A4-New-SmartArch-EU_WEB3.pdf. cited 2022 Dec 15.

8. Modi N, Gupta R, Borah M. 2020; Newer orthodontic archwires- a review. Int J Appl Dent Sci. 6:90–4. https://doi.org/10.22271/oral.2020.v6.i4b.1052. DOI: 10.22271/oral.2020.v6.i4b.1052.

9. Shah B. 2021. Bending and phase transformation properties of a force gradient nickel-titanium orthodontic wire [MS Thesis]. Marquette University;Milwaukee: https://epublications.marquette.edu/theses_open/675/.

10. Jain S, Sharma P, Shetty D. 2021; Comparison of two different initial archwires for tooth alignment during fixed orthodontic treatment- a randomized clinical trial. J Orthod Sci. 10:13. https://doi.org/10.4103/jos.JOS_17_20. DOI: 10.4103/jos.JOS_17_20. PMID: 34568209. PMCID: PMC8423150. PMID: f5250bee57114c899111ec3a3e434a84.

11. Azizi F, Extiari A, Imani MM. 2021; Tooth alignment and pain experience with A-NiTi versus Cu-NiTi: a randomized clinical trial. BMC Oral Health. 21:431. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-021-01789-5. DOI: 10.1186/s12903-021-01789-5. PMID: 34488744. PMCID: PMC8419894. PMID: 2602eca4c5f948f28c3cf4297a014b76.

12. Nabbat SA, Yassir YA. 2020; A clinical comparison of the effectiveness of two types of orthodontic aligning archwire materials: a multicentre randomized clinical trial. Eur J Orthod. 42:626–34. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjz102. DOI: 10.1093/ejo/cjz102. PMID: 32011678.

13. Atik E, Gorucu-Coskuner H, Akarsu-Guven B, Taner T. 2019; A comparative assessment of clinical efficiency between premium heat-activated copper nickel-titanium and superelastic nickel-titanium archwires during initial orthodontic alignment in adolescents: a randomized clinical trial. Prog Orthod. 20:46. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40510-019-0299-4. DOI: 10.1186/s40510-019-0299-4. PMID: 31840204. PMCID: PMC6911816. PMID: 9b958b03e78046d6b720967f070774c8.

14. Phermsang-Ngarm P, Charoemratrote C. 2018; Tooth and bone changes after initial anterior dental alignment using preformed vs customized nickel titanium archwires in adults: a randomized clinical trial. Angle Orthod. 88:425–34. https://doi.org/10.2319/090317-589.1. DOI: 10.2319/090317-589.1. PMID: 29561654. PMCID: PMC8191922.

15. Little RM. 1975; The irregularity index: a quantitative score of mandibular anterior alignment. Am J Orthod. 68:554–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(75)90086-x. DOI: 10.1016/0002-9416(75)90086-X. PMID: 1059332.

16. Malmgren O, Goldson L, Hill C, Orwin A, Petrini L, Lundberg M. 1982; Root resorption after orthodontic treatment of traumatized teeth. Am J Orthod. 82:487–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(82)90317-7. DOI: 10.1016/0002-9416(82)90317-7. PMID: 6961819.

17. Moher D, Hopewell S, Schulz KF, Montori V, Gøtzsche PC, Devereaux PJ, et al. 2010; CONSORT 2010 explanation and elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ. 340:c869. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.c869. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.c869. PMID: 20332511. PMCID: PMC2844943.

18. Mahmoudzadeh M, Farhadian M, Alijani S, Azizi F. 2018; Clinical comparison of two initial arch wires (A-NiTi and Heat Activated NiTi) for amount of tooth alignment and perception of pain: a randomized clinical trial. Int Orthod. 16:60–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ortho.2018.01.007. DOI: 10.1016/j.ortho.2018.01.007.

19. Aydın B, Şenışık NE, Koşkan Ö. 2018; Evaluation of the alignment efficiency of nickel-titanium and copper-nickel-titanium archwires in patients undergoing orthodontic treatment over a 12-week period: a single-center, randomized controlled clinical trial. Korean J Orthod. 48:153–62. https://doi.org/10.4041/kjod.2018.48.3.153. DOI: 10.4041/kjod.2018.48.3.153. PMID: 29732301. PMCID: PMC5932317.

20. Abdaljawwad AA, Al-Groosh DH. 2022; Effects of various analgesics on pain perception and rate of tooth movement: a randomized controlled clinical study. J Baghdad Coll Dent. 34:37–51. https://jbcd.uobaghdad.edu.iq/index.php/jbcd/article/view/3144. DOI: 10.26477/jbcd.v34i2.3144. PMID: d7095bcfad644b6e977d18949c3f0722.

21. Serafim CM, Gurgel Jde A, Tiago CM, Tavarez RR, Maia Filho EM. 2015; Clinical efficiency of two sequences of orthodontic wires to correct crowding of the lower anterior teeth. ScientificWorldJournal. 2015:690280. https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/690280. DOI: 10.1155/2015/690280. PMID: 26176018. PMCID: PMC4484832. PMID: 1ad63f61e38349619530649ae63cb0f3.

22. Gok F, Buyuk SK, Ozkan S, Benkli YA. 2018; Comparison of arch width and depth changes and pain/discomfort with conventional and copper Ni-Ti archwires for mandibular arch alignment. J World Fed Orthod. 7:24–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejwf.2018.01.001. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejwf.2018.01.001.

23. Luppanapornlarp S, Kajii TS, Surarit R, Iida J. 2010; Interleukin-1beta levels, pain intensity, and tooth movement using two different magnitudes of continuous orthodontic force. Eur J Orthod. 32:596–601. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjp158. DOI: 10.1093/ejo/cjp158. PMID: 20534713.

24. Yassir YA, McIntyre GT, Bearn DR. 2021; Orthodontic treatment and root resorption: an overview of systematic reviews. Eur J Orthod. 43:442–56. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjaa058. DOI: 10.1093/ejo/cjaa058. PMID: 33215186.

25. Weiland F. 2003; Constant versus dissipating forces in orthodontics: the effect on initial tooth movement and root resorption. Eur J Orthod. 25:335–42. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/25.4.335. DOI: 10.1093/ejo/25.4.335. PMID: 12938838.

26. Currell SD, Liaw A, Blackmore Grant PD, Esterman A, Nimmo A. 2019; Orthodontic mechanotherapies and their influence on external root resorption: a systematic review. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 155:313–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2018.10.015. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2018.10.015. PMID: 30826034.