OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this split-mouth single-centered, parallel-group, randomized clinical trial was to evaluate the efficiency of corticotomy-facilitated orthodontics in rapid canine retraction. METHODS: The sample consisted of 10 patients (15–25 years old) requiring extraction of the maxillary first premolars with subsequent canine retraction. The patients’ right sides were randomly assigned to either the corticotomy (experimental) or control groups. Corticotomy cuts and perforations were performed and canine retraction was initiated bilaterally with closed-coil nickel-titanium springs that applied 150 g of force. The following variables were examined till the end of canine retraction on both sides: Rate of canine retraction, canine root resorption, and patient perception of the procedure. The rate of canine retraction was assessed every month using study models while root resorption was evaluated using CBCT. Patient`s perception was evaluated using a 100 mm VAS. RESULT: Mean time taken for full completion of canine retraction: 5.7 months (test) and 7.1 months (control). Mean root resorption: 0.53 ± 0.10 (control) and 0.24 mm ± 0.10 (test). Mean VAS scores: 16 ± 3.94 (24 hours) and 2 ± 2.58 (1 week) at control side and 46.50 ± 6.69 (24 hours) and 2 ± 2.58 (1 week) at test. CONCLUSION: There was an overall reduction in the time taken for canine retraction with corticotomy; however, an increase in the rate of canine retraction in the corticotomy-facilitated method was evident only for the first four months, compared to the conventional method. Less root resorption was observed in corticotomy-facilitated method than conventional method. Pain perception was more for corticotomy-facilitated method than conventional method at 24 hours, but similar after one week.

Purpose: To compare skeletal and dentoalveolar measurements of subjects with unilateral impacted canine versus the non-impacted contralateral side using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). Materials and methods: 30 CBCTs with unilaterally impacted maxillary canines (Buccal=15, Palatal=15) were selected. Skeletal and dentoalveolar variables (alveolar ridge height of incisors, dentoalveolar height, angulations of incisors and canines, basal lateral width and premolar width) were compared between the impacted and the contralateral sides. Independent t-test was used to compare the variables. Results: There was a significant difference in the mean basal lateral width between the impacted (28.25±1.83 mm) and non-impacted (31.64±2.18 mm) sides. Premolar width was significantly lower on the impacted side (p<0.05). The canines exhibited significantly greater angulations on the impacted side compared to the nonimpacted side. The basal lateral width was significantly higher in the buccal subgroup (29.03±1.65mm) compared to palatal (27.48±1.70mm) on the impacted side. The intra-operator reliability was found to be high (0.99%). Conclusion: Significant differences were seen in canine angulation, premolar width and basal lateral width between impacted vs. non impacted sides. Basal lateral width was higher in buccal impacted cases compared to palatal.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the contributory factors of external apical root resorption. Materials and Methods: Sixty subjects who had undergone complete orthodontic treatment were selected. The difference of the root length between pre and post-treatment was measured. The degree of root resorption was scored according to the index proposed by Levander and Malmgren. 1 The mean root resorption score (MRRS) was calculated. Mann Whitney test was done to compare the groups. Pearson correlation was applied. Results: There was no statistically significant difference in root resorption among males and females. Tooth extraction was correlated with MRRS. Except for upper posterior teeth, the duration of treatment was positively correlated with MRRS. For overjet, there was a positive correlation between upper and lower anterior teeth and MRRS. Conclusion: Orthodontic treatment should be carefully performed in patients who need extraction, great retraction of maxillary incisors and prolonged therapy.

No abstract

A bstract Failure of eruption of maxillary incisors requires careful diagnosis and treatment planning. The cause of impaction may vary from physical obstruction in the path of eruption, tooth material arch length discrepancy to malformation of the tooth. General principles of management of the condition include removal of physical obstruction, creation of space, and surgical exposure with or without traction. The treatment of an unerupted tooth depends upon its age, position, etiology, and amount of space in the dental arch. This case series elaborates on three different cases of incisor impaction with different etiologies and varying ranges of complexity. Three-dimensional radiography was utilized in all cases to accurately visualize the impacted tooth and its relation to adjacent structures. All the cases required different approaches and were completed in varying time durations. Meticulous treatment planning resulted in well-aligned satisfactory functional and esthetic results. How to cite this article: Jain S, Raza M, Sharma P, et al. Unraveling Impacted Maxillary Incisors: The Why, When, and How. Int J Clin Pediatr Dent 2021;14(1):149–157.