Skip to main content Skip to main navigation menu Skip to site footer

How suited are the different commercially available archwires for the Egyptian dental arches?


 Background: The purpose of this study was to investigate the suitability of the widths of some commercially available preformed NiTi arch wires to the dental arch widths of a sample of the Egyptian population.

Methods: This cross-sectional study included 420 maxillary and mandibular pairs of casts for subjects with an age range of 10-16 years as part of project by the National Research Centre. The casts were traced using TracerNet; intercanine and intermolar widths were measured on the casts. Anterior and posterior arch lengths were measured to facilitates the measurements on the wires. The intercanine and intermolar widths of eight commercially available archwires were measured on a graph paper.

Results: Regression analysis was performed to create a regression model for the predicted means of the intercanine and intermolar widths in different age groups. The mean square error (MSE) was calculated for all the available arch wires in relation to the dental arch. Ormco (Broad arch/small) had the lowest MSE; 1.55 for the upper intercanine width and 1.72 for the upper intermolar width. For the lower intercanine width its MSE was 0.30 for the Ormco and 0.31 for Ortho Technology, while for the lower intermolar width it was 0.78 for Ormco.

Conclusions: The commercially available archwires were all considerably larger than the mean dental arch size of the majority of the population, except for the Ormco; thus, inviting potential relapse of treatment. It is necessary to produce a wider range of customized archwires that better suit the dental arch sizes of the Egyptian population.


  1. Triviño T, Siqueira DF, Scanavini MA. A new concept of mandibular dental arch forms with normal occlusion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2008;133: 10.
  2. Taner TU, Ciger S, El H, Germeç D, Es A. Evaluation of dental arch width and form changes after orthodontic treatment and retention with a new computerized method. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2004;126:464-475.
  3. Adamek A, Minch L, Beata Kawala B. Intercanine Width – Review of the Literature. Dent. Med. Probl. 2015;52(3):336–340.
  4. Fleming PS, Dibiase AT, Lee RT. Arch form and dimensional changes in orthodontics. Prog Orthod. 2008;9: 66- 73.
  5. Uhde MD, Sadowsky C, begole E. Long term stability of dental relationships after orthodontic treatment. Angle Orthod. 1983;53:240–252.
  6. Gardner SD, Chaconas SJ. Posttreatment and postretention changes following orthodontic therapy. Angle Orthod. 1976;46:151–161.
  7. Amott RD. A serial study of dental arch measurements on orthodontic subjects. Chicago: Northwestern University, 1962. Thesis.
  8. Beazley WW. Assessment of mandibular arch length discrepancy using an individualized arch form. Angle Orthod 1971;61:45-54.
  9. 9- El-Mangoury NH. Orthodontic relapse in subjects with varying degrees of anterior and vertical dysplasia. Am J Orthod 1979;75:548
  10. Johnson KC. Cases six years postretention. Angle Orthod 1977;47:210-221.
  11. Graber TM. Serial extraction: A continuous diagnostic and decisional process. Am J Orthod 1971;60:541-575.
  12. Lane TL. The role of the permanent canines in the race for space. Am J Orthod 1962; 48:241-250.
  13. Mccauley DR. The cuspid and its function in retention. Am J Orthod 1944; 30:196-205.
  14. Shapiro PA. Mandibular dental arch form and dimension. Am J Orthod 1974;66:58-70.
  15. Burke SP, Silveira AM, Goldsmith LJ, Yancey YM, Stewart A, Scarfe WC. A meta-analysis of mandibular inter-canine width in treatment and post retention. Angle Orthod. 1997;68:53-60.
  16. Prasad M, Kannampallil ST, Talapaneni AK, George SA & Shetty SK. Evaluation of arch width variations among different skeletal patterns in South Indian population. Journal of Natural Science, Biology and Medicine 2013;4(1): 94-102.
  17. Lombardo L, Coppola P, Siciliani G: Comparison of dental and alveolar arch forms between different ethnic groups. Int Orthod 2015;13(4):462-88.
  18. Bayome M, Sameshima GT, Kim Y, Nojima K, Baek SH & Kook YA: Comparison of arch forms between Egyptian and North American white populations. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2011;139(3):245-52.
  19. Mahmood A, Amjad N, Masood RT, Nazir R. Analysis Of “Best Fit” Of Commercially Available Archwires With Mandibular Arch Form. Pakistan Oral & Dental Journal 2019;39(2):121-124.
  20. Elattar H, Alsulami A, Alharbi K, Alyamani L, Gary L. Comparison of commercially available archwires with normal dental arch in a group of Saudi population. E.D.J. 2020; 66(3):1413-1421.
  21. Aitchison J: some racial contrasts in teeth and dental arches. Dent. Mag. And Oral Topics 1965,82:201-205
  22. Othman SA, Xinwei ES, Lim SY, Jamaludin M, Mohamed NH, Yusof ZY, Shoaib LA, Nik Hussein NN. Comparison of arch form between ethnic Malays and Malaysian Aborigines in Peninsular Malaysia. Korean J Orthod. 2012;42(1):47-54.
  23. El-Wakeel K, Hassan N. Photo-anthropometry of adult Egyptian hand. The Egyptian Journal of Forensic Sciences and Applied Toxicology 2020; 20(4):91-105.
  24. Motamedi AMK, Dadgar S, Teimouri F, Aslani F Stability of changes in mandibular intermolar and intercuspid distances following orthodontic treatment. Dent Res J (Isfahan) 2015;12(1):71–75.
  25. Ward DE, WorkmanJ, Brown R, Richmond S. Changes in Arch Width A 20-year Longitudinal Study of Orthodontic Treatment. Angle Orthod. 2006;76(1):1-13.
  26. Knott VB. Size and form of the dental arches in children with good occlusion studied longitudinally from 9 years to late adolescence. Am J Phys Anthropol. (New Series) 1961;19:263–284.
  27. Knott VB. Longitudinal study of dental arch widths at four stages of dentition. Angle Orthod. 1972;42:387–394. 24.
  28. Moorrees CFA, Chadha JM. Available space for the incisors during dental development: a growth study based on physiologic age. Angle Orthod. 1965;35:12–22.
  29. Bishara SE, Chadha JM, Potter RB. Stability of intercanine width, overbite, and overjet correction. Am J Orthod. 1973;63(6):588-95.
  30. Hemamalini Balaji: Dental Arch Patterns and its role in Orthodontics –A review. International Journal of Pharmaceutical Science and Health Care 2017;2(7):91-98.
  31. Lavelle CL, Foster TD, Flinn RM. Dental arches in various ethnic groups. Angle Orthod. 1971;41(4):293-9.
  32. Henrikson J, Persson M, Thilander B. Long-term stability of dental arch form in normal occlusion from 13 to 31 years of age. Eur J Orthod. 2001;23(1):51-61.
  33. Raberin M, Laumon B, Martin J L, Brunner F. Dimensions and form of dental arches in subjects with normal occlusions. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1993;104:67–72
  34. Murshid ZA: Integrity of dental arch form: A review. EDJ. 2013;43:55-67.
  35. Lombardo L, Fattori L, Molinari C, Mirabella D, Siciliani G. Dental and alveolar arch forms in a Caucasian population compared with commercially available archwires. Int Orthod. 2013;11(4):389-421.
  36. Oda S, Arai K, Nakahara R: Commercially available archwire forms compared with normal dental arch forms in a Japanese population. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2010;137(4):520–27.
  37. Hedayati Z, Fakhri F, & Gosha VM: Comparison of Commercially Available archwires with Normal Dental Arch in a Group of Iranian Population. J Dent Shiraz Univ Med Sci. 2015;16(2):106-12.
  38. Bishara SE, Treder JE, Jakobsen JR. Facial and dental changes in adulthood. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1994;106:175-86
  39. Carter GA, Mcnamara JA Jr. Longitudinal dental arch changes in adults. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1998;114:88–99.

How to Cite

Elhiny, O. A., Abou Elyazied, M., & Salem, G. A. (2021). How suited are the different commercially available archwires for the Egyptian dental arches?. Bali Medical Journal, 10(3), 1050–1055.




Search Panel

Omnia A. Elhiny
Google Scholar
BMJ Journal

Mohammed Abou Elyazied
Google Scholar
BMJ Journal

Ghada A. Salem
Google Scholar
BMJ Journal