Role of removable appliances in contemporary orthodontics

Introduction

Removable appliances (RAs) are those that can be removed and inserted into the mouth by the patient. Although the scope and use of RAs have now significantly reduced as a primary therapeutic appliance of choice for comprehensive orthodontic treatment, these appliances are suitable and efficient in treating certain traits of malocclusion when used in isolation or tandem with a fixed appliance system.

Conventionally, most orthodontic retainers and functional appliances (FA) are RAs, though this group of appliances is considered a separate entity.

Recent advances in the removable appliance

The transparent aligners or clear aligners are removable type appliances. Clear aligners for orthodontic therapy were first introduced in the United States in 1999 and were aggressively promoted by ‘Invisalign’. The ‘invisible braces’ or clear aligners provide an aesthetic edge over visible fixed appliances due to their transparent colour and lack of metal components. Clear aligners are now made available by many orthodontic traders of different names throughout the world. The clear aligners are discussed in detail in Chapters 41 and 42 .

History of removable appliance

Historically, the development of fixed appliances preceded that of RAs. Pierre Fauchard, father of modern dentistry, in his 2-volume opus entitled, ‘The Surgeon Dentist: Treatise on the Teeth’ published in 1728 described the bandeau, an expansion arch consisting of a horseshoe-shaped strip of precious metal to which the teeth were ligated.

In 1836, German dentist Friedrich Christoph Kneisel (1797–1847) was the first to use plaster models to record malocclusion. He also used a chin strap for his prognathic patients, perhaps the first removable orthodontic appliance, and a removable plate similar to today’s bite plate ( Fig. 40.1 ).

Figure 40.1

A contemporary Hawley’s appliance and its components.

Further evolution of RAs was linked to the development of the process of rubber vulcanisation. The invention of vulcanite by Charles Goodyear in 1839 significantly reduced the cost and weight of dental plates and other appliances. The earlier attempts to commercialise the new material were not practical because of the unstable properties of the rubber. It softened when heated and was partially soluble in water. Later, when Goodyear accidentally discovered ‘sulphur cross-linking,’ rubber became a functional material ( Table 40.1 ).

The discovery of polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) and its use in dentistry substituted vulcanite plates with acrylic for orthodontic appliances. PMMA is an odourless polymer of acrylic acid that Redtenbacher reported for the first time in 1843. However, the development of PMMA for dental and medical uses was a gradual process that spread over decades. Table 40.1 shows key stages during the development of PMMA for dental and medical applications. PMMA is used to make artificial teeth, dentures, acrylic crowns and various appliances ( Table 40.1 ).

TABLE 40.1

Polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) applications in dentistry and medicine

Source: Table modified from Zafar MS. Prosthodontic applications of polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA): an update. Polymers (Basel) 2020 Oct 8;12(10):2299. DOI: 10.3390/polym12102299. PMID: 33049984; PMCID: PMC7599472.

Year PMMA applications
1937 Polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) was introduced in powder form for denture base fabrication.
1945 Neurosurgeons found PMMA useful to substitute missing part of the skull in cranioplasties
1945 Room temperature or cold-cured PMMA became commercially available
1946 All full and partial dentures were made with PMMA
1950s Orthopaedic surgeons used PMMA for the cementation of femoral bone prostheses
1950s to 1960s PMMA’s use by dental professionals dramatically increased for a variety of applications, including dentures, temporary or provisional crowns, and maxillofacial prostheses
21st century Ongoing research and modifications of existing PMMA materials are improving the mechanical and physical properties.

The labial bow was first introduced by Charles Hawley sometime around 1919 ( Fig. 40.1 ).

Adams’ arrowhead clasp is the most widely used clasp for retaining RAs. This clasp is a modification of the original Jackson’s clasp (1906) and is superior in retention properties of the arrowhead clasp given by Schwarz. The modified arrowhead clasp, which is popularly known as ‘Adams’ clasp’, was introduced by Adams in 1950.

Indications of removable appliances

RAs have developed and evolved considerably over time from their original design. However, their inherent mechanical properties are such that they are most effective only for simple tipping of teeth. Multiple simultaneous tooth movements with apical control are not possible with them. RAs are most effective in correcting :

  • 1.

    Cross-bite

  • 2.

    Ectopic tooth position

  • 3.

    Anterior spacing and overjet

  • 4.

    Deep bite

  • 5.

    Targeted yet limited interventions in the mixed dentition

  • 6.

    As an adjunct to more complex treatment with fixed appliances

However, RAs are less efficient in treating :

  • i.

    Crowding

  • ii.

    Rotations

  • iii.

    Intra-arch tooth movements and

  • iv.

    Correction of molar relationships

Advantages of removable appliances

  • 1.

    RAs are simple to fabricate, use and adjust so that they may require minimal chair time in the hands of an expert.

  • 2.

    The use of RAs exhibit lesser orthodontic scars compared to fixed appliances. These scars include enamel decalcification, dental caries under molar bands, white spots around bonded brackets and gingivitis.

  • 3.

    Cost-effective.

  • 4.

    RAs are the appliances of choice in the first stage of the correction of a posterior cross-bite.

  • 5.

    RAs are commonly used during mixed dentition for the treatment of a variety of interceptive procedures.

  • 6.

    RAs deserve preference if one considers the risk factors and the relationship between work volume and effect.

Limitations and disadvantages

RA can be removed by the patient, and therefore, treatment may be disrupted in non-compliant patients. However, the ability to remove the appliance on socially sensitive occasions is a great advantage for some patients, such as TV anchors and news readers. Other limitations are:

  • 1.

    Limited control over tooth movement.

  • 2.

    Only certain types of malocclusions can be corrected.

  • 3.

    Tooth movement in the three dimensions of space is not possible.

  • 4.

    It may hinder speech and eating.

  • 5.

    Appliances may be lost or broken.

  • 6.

    The residual monomer of acrylic resin may cause allergy and soft tissue irritation.

  • 7.

    Efficacy of RAs depends on patient compliance.

Treatment effectiveness

When treatment effectiveness was measured by improvement in occlusal index (OI) scores, the severity of malocclusion obtained from pre-treatment and post-treatment study casts revealed that treatment efficiency and the treatment results of the removable appliance were found to be inferior to those of the fixed appliance. Hence, the use of RAs should be limited to specific indications or as an adjunct to fixed appliance therapy.

Hawley’s appliance and bite plate

These are synonymous with RAs made of acrylic base plates and wire components. Components of a Hawley-type removable appliance are as follows ( Figs 40.1 and 40.2 ):

  • 1.

    Passive component or the body or a plate

  • 2.

    Retentive components

  • 3.

    Active components

Passive components

The body of the appliance is made of PMMA and usually covers the palate up to the second molar region. The acrylic plate is made of self-cure or heat-cure acrylic material on a dental cast which was prepared from an accurate alginate impression.

The appliance’s wire components, such as a labial bow, clasps and springs, are retained in the acrylic body. The acrylic body should be of sufficient thickness to ensure optimum strength and rigidity to hold wire components. Fibre-reinforced composite (FRC) fibres are incorporated during acrylisation to reinforce polymeric parts of a removable orthodontic appliance.

Following the fabrication of wire components acrylisation is completed. The appliance should be embedded in water overnight before delivery to ensure that any residual monomer reacts with PMMA or is leached out in the water.

The acrylic body provides anchorage to the appliance by intimate contact with the oral mucosa and contour of the palate. Well-adapted acrylic extensions into the inter-dental embrasures and retentive wire components, which anchor onto the teeth, ensure the stability of the appliance. The appliance should be well fitting, not cause any undue pressure on oral soft and hard tissues and remain stable.

Retentive components

Retentive elements of the appliance are made of stainless steel (SS) spring hard round wire, which retain the appliance in the oral cavity primarily through clasp-like structures wrapped around the anchor teeth or between the teeth embrasures. Although several types of retentive clasps have been designed, the simpler ones are better for the ease of fabrication and adjustment. Commonly used retentive clasps are:

  • Ball-end hooks/pinhead

  • C-clasp

  • Arrowhead clasp: Single or double

  • Adams’ clasp

  • Delta clasp

  • Southend clasp

  • Passive labial bow

Wire dimensions used for making components of RAs are tabulated in Table 40.2 .

TABLE 40.2

Suggested wire dimensions for different components of removable appliances

Components Wire dimension (mm) Gauge Inches
  • 1.

    Labial bow

0.7 22 0.028
  • 2.

    Roberts’ retraction labial bow

0.5 inserted tube 24 0.020
  • 3.

    Adams’ clasp, arrowhead

0.6 or 0.7 23 or 22 0.024 or 0.028
  • 4.

    Adams’ single clasp

0.6 or 0.7 23 or 22 0.024 or 0.028
  • 5.

    Ball-end clasp

0.7 22 0.028
  • 6.

    Z spring

0.5 24 0.020
  • 7.

    Finger spring free end

0.7 22 0.028
  • 8.

    Supported canine retractor

0.7 22 0.028
  • 9.

    Coffin spring

1.25 18 0.048
  • 10.

    Face bow

    • Inner bow

1.25 18 0.045
    • Outer bow

1.62 16 0.060
1.82 15 0.071

Ball-end hooks, pin-head hooks and single arrowhead clasps provide retention by engaging the clasp head into the buccal interdental embrasures gingival to the contact point. Retention clasps are mostly used in the posterior segment, commonly between the premolars. The clasps should be well adapted to the embrasure to minimise any interference with teeth in the opposite jaw during occlusion. A modification of pinhead clasp is a triangular clasp.

C-clasp: C-clasp wraps around to provide retention due to the placement of its free end gingival to the maximum contour of the buccal surface of the anchor tooth. The premolars and molars are the main source of tooth-borne anchorage.

Adams’ clasp or double arrowhead clasp : Devised by C.P. Adams, it is the most used retention clasp, which engages the first molar and is often a primary retaining device. It is a modification of Jackson’s clasp ( Fig. 40.2 C). The Adams clasp can be modified to serve an auxiliary function, such as holding rubber elastic for traction. The most useful modification is a traction hook or a loop. The clasp can also be modified by soldering a hook on its buccal bridge or by making a helix in the horizontal arm to engage elastics ( Fig. 40.2 C and D).

Figure 40.2

Retaining clasps.

(A) C clasp (red arrow) and pin head clasp (blue arrow). (B) Triangular head clasp. (C) Jackson’s clasp. (D) Modified Adams’ clasp with built-in helix for engagement of elastic (red arrow). (E) Modified Adams’ clasp with a soldered hook (blue arrow).

Delta clasp : This is a modification of Adams’ clasp, which is an excellent retentive clasp for premolars. William Clark recommends the delta clasp as a retaining component of the lower twin block on the premolars.

Southend clasp : It is a short labial bow wrapped around two central incisors designed to hold the appliance in the anterior end.

Labial bow: Conventionally, the labial bow is made as a wraparound wire around six anterior teeth up to the distal contact point of the canines. The loops usually are made about two-thirds the width of the canine’s mesiodistal width. The height of loops is extended 2–3 mm beyond the free gingival margin of the canine ( Fig. 106.7 B). The long labial bow can extend distal to the first and second premolars and even wrap around the distal to the last erupted molar, as the case may necessitate.

A passive labial bow stabiles the appliance in situ and maintains the position of the teeth it is wrapped around. When activated with sufficient relief on the palatal surfaces of the anterior teeth, it slowly retracts the anterior segment. A labial bow is an effective device for retroclining the labially proclined incisors. Retroclination of the incisors makes them look longer due to the extrusion associated with lingual tipping. Extrusion of maxillary incisors is rather tricky to control, which results in a further increase in deep bite and increased incisor visibility ( Fig. 40.3 ). A conventional labial bow has a limited range of action on tooth movement which is limited to lingual tipping.

Figure 40.3

Principles of bite opening and maxillary incisor retraction using a removable appliance. (A and B) The bite opening should be achieved before initiation of incisor retraction.

(C) The labial bow activation is initiated after bite opening and due to the trimming of acrylic on palatal surface of the plate to provide relief for the anterior teeth. (D) After incisor retraction. The lingual crown tipping is associated with some amount of extrusion and labial root tipping (black arrow). Blue allow indicates extrusive component.

A modification of a RA, where elastic traction force can be used to enhance lingual tooth movement of the maxillary anterior teeth and prevent extrusion or facilitate their effective intrusion, involves a conversion of labial bow U loops into hooks at a level higher than the gingival contour of the canines. A light elastic (2.5 ounces Begg elastic) substitutes the labial bow, which runs from either side of the hooks and under the small tags of light cure composite attachments temporarily bonded on incisors to engage the rubber band. The modified labial bow is a compromised substitute for an intrusion arch used in fully fixed appliances.

Several modifications of the labial bow have been suggested. These include a reverse loop labial bow ( Fig. 40.4 A and B), a Mills’ labial bow ( Fig. 40.4 C) and Roberts’ retractor ( Fig. 40.4 D).

Figure 40.4

Modified labial bows.

(A and B) Reverse loop labial bow. (C) Mills’ labial bow. (D) Roberts’ retractor.

Roberts’ retractor : It has an efficient spring design made from 0.5 mm diameter SS wire. The distal arm is supported with a tube. The retractor is adjusted just below the helix on the mesial arm of the loop by compressing the loop. The appliance produces light forces, which are efficient for the correction of the proclination of teeth. Activation up to 3 mm/visit is recommended ( Fig. 40.4 D).

Hawley’s retainer is a passive Hawley’s appliance. The appliance is used as a retainer device after extraction or non-extraction orthodontic treatment completion. The final labiolingual position of the anterior teeth is maintained by incorporating the first-order bends in the labial bow, similar to the intensity of the prescription of the fixed appliance used in treating the malocclusion ( Fig. 106.9 A).

May 10, 2026 | Posted by in Orthodontics | 0 comments

Leave a Reply

VIDEdental - Online dental courses

Get VIDEdental app for watching clinical videos