Comparison of rate of retraction and anchorage loss using nickel titanium closed coil springs and elastomeric chain during the en-masse retraction: A clinical study

Chaudhari, Charushila Vinay; Tarvade, Suchita Madhukar

doi:10.4103/2321-3825.150582

Cited by 16 publications

(36 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The characteristics of the included studies are shown (Table ). A total of 4 RCTs were included in this review, two RCTs presented with a split‐mouth design and two RCTs presented with a parallel‐group design . An a priori sample size calculation was performed in one study …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Two‐hundred grams of force was the mostly utilized force during space closure except in one RCT . Two RCTs reported the means of the outcomes without their respective standard deviations or standard errors. Although authors of these studies were contacted twice via email to provide information on the missing data, no response was obtained.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The summary and risk of bias graph are presented (Figure ). The RCT by Dixon et al was identified to have an overall low risk of bias across all examined domains; another RCT had unclear risk of bias due to lack of descriptions of random sequence generation and allocation concealment, while the remaining RCTs had high risk of bias. A Cohen kappa statistic of 0.93 indicated good inter‐rater agreement between the two review authors.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Effectiveness of nickel‐titanium springs vs elastomeric chains in orthodontic space closure: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Mohammed

Rizk

Wafaie

et al. 2017

Orthod Craniofacial Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study is to explore the effectiveness of nickel titanium closing springs (NiTi-CS) and elastomeric power chains (EPC) in orthodontic space closure and to assess the adverse periodontal effects, cost efficiency and patient-centred outcomes between both of these methods. Methods: An electronic search of online databases (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, LILACS and Web of Science), reference lists and grey literature as well as hand search were conducted without language restriction up to November/2017. Two authors blindly and in duplicate were involved in study selection, quality assessment and the extraction of data. Only randomized clinical trials (RCTs) were included. The quality of the studies was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias tool.95% confidence intervals and mean difference for continuous data were calculated. A meta-analysis that generated a random-effect model for the comparable outcomes was conducted, and heterogeneity was measured using I 2 statistic. Results: Of 187 records, 4 RCTs met the criteria and were included in the quantitative synthesis featuring 290 test quadrants. Faster space closure with NiTi-CS was observed with a mean difference of (0.20 mm/month, 95% CI: 0.12 to 0.28). Loss of anchorage appears to be similar within both groups when synthesized qualitatively. With exception to anchorage loss, secondary outcomes could not be investigated in the included trials.Conclusions: There is a moderate quality of evidence suggesting a faster orthodontic space closure with the NiTi-CS when compared to EPC. A comparable amount of anchorage loss was observed regardless of the utilized method of space closure. Further high-quality RCTs with parallel-groups, reporting on the adverse effects and patientcentred values, are recommended. K E Y W O R D Smeta-analysis, nickel-titanium, power chain elastic, space closure, systematic review

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effectiveness of nickel‐titanium springs vs elastomeric chains in orthodontic space closure: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Mohammed

Rizk

Wafaie

et al. 2017

Orthod Craniofacial Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…They are practical, efficient and of low cost, but they undergo progressive reduction in force magnitude and their properties are affected by humidity and temperature (10,11) . On the other hand, closed NiTi coil springs can be used as substitutes as they are superior to intermaxillary elastics in generating lower and more continuous forces that are affected to a lesser degree with humidity and pH (14,15) . No recent studies were found describing skeletal, dental and soft tissue effects of intermaxillary NiTi coil springs in Class II division treatment.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, closed Nickel Titanium (NiTi) coil springs maybe a better substitute as they generate lower and more continuous forces that are affected to a lesser degree with humidity and pH. This characteristic of better force maintenance may cause faster and more physiologic movement with minimal aggression to dental and periodontal tissues (14,15) .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of Dentoskeletal Changes Accompanying the Treatment of Class II Malocclusion by Advansync Appliance versus Intermaxillary Coil Spring Mechanics

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives:The present study was designed to determine and compare the skeletal, dentoalveolar and soft tissue effects produced by the Advansync functional appliance and intermaxillary NiTi coil springs in the treatment of growing patients with Class II division 1 malocclusion. Subjects and methods: A sample of 19 growing patients, as evaluated by hand wrist radiographs, with age range 12-15 years was divided into two groups. Group I patients were treated with the Advansync appliance (n=10) and Group II patients were treated using intermaxillary NiTi coil springs (n=9). The study was conducted using lateral cephalograms taken before appliance insertion and immediately after appliance removal. Treatment changes were evaluated for each group and compared between both groups. Data were analyzed using Paired sample t-test for each group and Independent t-test for comparing groups together. Results: The use of Advansync and fixed appliances (Group I) resulted in significant decrease in SNA and ANB angles (p≤0.001). Dental changes included retroclination of maxillary teeth, proclination and intrusion of mandibular teeth as well as mesialization of mandibular molars (p≤0.001). On the other hand, SNA and ANB showed non-significant changes for patients treated with intermaxillary NiTi coil springs (Group II) (p≥0.05). While dental changes included retroclination of maxillary teeth, proclination and intrusion of mandibular teeth as well as mesialization of mandibular molars (p≤0.001) which were greater in Group II than Group I. The effects of both treatment modalities showed significant increases in total mandibular length and anterior facial height (p≤0.01 and p≤0.05) with no significant difference between both groups. Lower lip to PtV was the Codex : 44/1810 azhardentj@azhar.edu.eg only soft tissue measurement with significant changes (p≤0.05) for each group and was non-significant when the two groups were compared together. Conclusion: Both treatment modalities were effective in treating Class II division 1 malocclusion. The Advansync appliance produced its effect through maxillary growth restriction and dentoalveolar changes. While the effects of intermaxillary NiTi coil springs were only dentoalveolar, but more than the Advansync appliance.

show abstract

Does corticotomy accelerate canine retraction with adequate anchorage control? A split mouth randomized controlled trial

Sharma¹,

Gupta²,

Ahuja³

et al. 2020

Orthodontic Waves

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Comparison of rate of retraction and anchorage loss using nickel titanium closed coil springs and elastomeric chain during the en-masse retraction: A clinical study

Cited by 16 publications

References 0 publications

Effectiveness of nickel‐titanium springs vs elastomeric chains in orthodontic space closure: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Effectiveness of nickel‐titanium springs vs elastomeric chains in orthodontic space closure: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Evaluation of Dentoskeletal Changes Accompanying the Treatment of Class II Malocclusion by Advansync Appliance versus Intermaxillary Coil Spring Mechanics

Does corticotomy accelerate canine retraction with adequate anchorage control? A split mouth randomized controlled trial

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About