Conclusion Costs for repeated treatment of post-orthodontic enamel damages produced by conventional vestibular fixed appliances may easily exceed the initially higher costs associated with lingual orthodontic treatment .
Judged economically in the long term , lingual MB Tx may be considered as a more cost-effective solution for a correction of malocclusion
Background Post-orthodontic white-spot lesions ( WSL ) in esthetically relevant incisor and canine areas impair dentofacial esthetics , and preventive dentistry treatment is definitely required in case of enamel cavitations .
The incidence of lingual post-orthodontic WSL and cavitation following lingual MB treatment has been reported to be distinctively decreased compared to labial MB treatment .
Moreover , lingual WSL do not impair dentofacial esthetics .
It was the objective of this study to calculate consequential costs of preventive dental care necessary to recover labial or lingual post-orthodontic cavitations as well as esthetically relevant WSL following either labial or lingual MB interventions .
Caries outcomes after orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances: do lingual brackets make a difference?
Orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances is considered a risk factor for the development of  white spot caries lesions ( WSL ) . Traditionally , brackets are bonded to the buccal surfaces . Lingual brackets are developing rapidly and have become more readily available . Buccal surfaces are considered to be more caries prone than lingual surfaces . Furthermore , lingual brackets are shaped to fit the morphology of the teeth and seal almost the entire surface . In the present study we tested the hypothesis that lingual brackets result in a lower caries incidence than buccal brackets . We tested this hypothesis using a split-mouth design where subjects were allocated r and omly to a group receiving either buccal or lingual brackets on the maxillary teeth and the alternative bracket type in the m and ible . The results indicate that buccal surfaces are more prone to WSL development , especially when WSL existed before treatment . The number of WSL that developed or progressed on buccal surfaces was 4.8 times higher than the number of WSL that developed or progressed on lingual surfaces . When measured using quantitative light-induced fluorescence ( QLF ) , the increase in integrated fluorescence loss was 10.6 times higher buccally than lingually . We conclude that lingual brackets make a difference when caries lesion incidence is concerned
Conclusion Costs for repeated treatment of post-orthodontic enamel damages produced by conventional vestibular fixed appliances may easily exceed the initially higher costs associated with lingual orthodontic treatment .
Judged economically in the long term , lingual MB Tx may be considered as a more cost-effective solution for a correction of malocclusion
Background Post-orthodontic white-spot lesions ( WSL ) in esthetically relevant incisor and canine areas impair dentofacial esthetics , and preventive dentistry treatment is definitely required in case of enamel cavitations .
The incidence of lingual post-orthodontic WSL and cavitation following lingual MB treatment has been reported to be distinctively decreased compared to labial MB treatment .
Moreover , lingual WSL do not impair dentofacial esthetics .
It was the objective of this study to calculate consequential costs of preventive dental care necessary to recover labial or lingual post-orthodontic cavitations as well as esthetically relevant WSL following either labial or lingual MB interventions .