Duration and Anchorage Management of Canine Retraction with Bodily Versus Tipping Mechanics

Shpack, Nir; Davidovitch, Moshe; Sarne, Ofer; Panayi, Narchos; Vardimon, Alexander D.

doi:10.2319/011707-24.1

Cited by 58 publications

(49 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…23 The use of an acrylic guide adapted to the anterior palate was proposed by Lotzof et al 24 and reused by Shpack et al 16 Constituent material and orthodontic archwire diameter can influence tooth movement during sliding mechanics. It is known that stiffer wires can better resist the tendency of teeth tilting during sliding.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Radiographic methods, although effective for determining canine retraction and loss of anchor, 18 expose patients to unnecessary radiation and do not allow the evaluation of canine rotation. As in many other studies, 15,16,[18][19][20][21][22] plaster models were used here to obtain the measurements.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…13 Others randomized the side in which each system would be employed to reduce clinical research bias. [14][15][16] In the present study, randomization was chosen because the precision in bracket positioning could vary according to the patient's side. Such bias could influence the results, especially the evaluation of canine rotation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Maxillary canine retraction with self-ligating and conventional brackets

Mezomo¹,

Lima²,

Menezes³

et al. 2011

The Angle Orthodontist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To measure space closure during the retraction of upper permanent canines with selfligating and conventional brackets. Materials and Methods: Fifteen patients who required maxillary canine retraction into first premolar extraction sites as part of their orthodontic treatment completed this study. In a random split-mouth design, the retraction of upper canines was performed using an elastomeric chain with 150 g of force. The evaluations were performed in dental casts (T0, initial; T1, 4 weeks; T2, 8 weeks; T3, 12 weeks). The amount of movement and the rotation of the canines as well as anchorage loss of the upper first molars were evaluated. Results: There was no difference between self-ligating and conventional brackets regarding the distal movement of upper canines and mesial movement of first molars (P . .05). Rotation of the upper canines was minimized with self-ligating brackets (P , .05). Conclusion: Distal movement of the upper canines and anchorage loss of the first molars were similar with both conventional and self-ligating brackets. Rotation of the upper canines during sliding mechanics was minimized with self-ligating brackets. (Angle Orthod. 2011;81:292-297.)

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Maxillary canine retraction with self-ligating and conventional brackets

Mezomo¹,

Lima²,

Menezes³

et al. 2011

The Angle Orthodontist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Previous studies have focused on the comparison of force magnitude, the relationship between the M/F ratio and the center of rotation, anchorage loss, tooth movement rate, and appliance efficiency [18][19][20][21][22]. However, whether one type of tooth movement is physiologically healthy and appropriate depends on whether it can lead to a well biological response within periodontal tissue.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Three-dimensional FEM analysis of stress distribution in dynamic maxillary canine movement

Jing

Han

Cheng³

et al. 2013

Chin. Sci. Bull.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An alteration in stress/strain distribution within periodontal ligament (PDL) occurs when the tooth is mechanical stimulated in orthodontic treatment. The majority of previous finite element studies were confined to a static evaluation on initial loading status, and a dynamic long-term analysis was rarely performed in orthodontics. The present study sought to analyze the stress distribution patterns within tooth root, PDL, and alveolar bone during dynamic canine tipping and bodily movement with three-dimensional finite element method in four consecutive therapeutic weeks. We observed that the highest stress was on root surface, secondly alveolar bone, and finally, PDL for either tipping or bodily movement. Throughout the PDL and root surface, the highest stress was always around the cervical area in both patterns of movement through four phases. Moreover, a lower and more uniform stress distribution was produced during bodily movement compared with tipping movement. These results indicated that canine translation might be healthier for periodontal tissue than tipping movement; the cervical region bore a greater load and might also be a susceptible area for tissue damage (except for the apex) regardless of movement pattern. dynamic tooth movement, finite element method (FEM), stress distribution Citation:Jing Y, Han X L, Cheng B H, et al. Three-dimensional FEM analysis of stress distribution in dynamic maxillary canine movement.

show abstract

“…Also, poor anchorage control often results in tooth crowns tipping into the extraction space, which increases treatment time because roots need to be uprighted after space closure. 8 Long-term stability is believed to rely on root parallelism in that orthodontic relapse and periodontal damage are associated with a poorly aligned dentition. 9 Vertical control of both the anterior and posterior segments is also important in the management of overbite, occlusal plane, and skeletal pattern.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Initial forces experienced by the anterior and posterior teeth during dental-anchored or skeletal-anchored en masse retraction in vitro

Lee

Heo

El‐Bialy

et al. 2016

The Angle Orthodontist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To investigate initial forces acting on teeth around the arch during en masse retraction using an in vitro Orthodontic SIMulator (OSIM). Materials and Methods: The OSIM was used to represent the full maxillary arch in a case wherein both first premolars had been extracted. Dental and skeletal anchorage to a posted archwire and skeletal anchorage to a 10-mm power arm were all simulated. A 0.019 3 0.025-inch stainless steel archwire was used in all cases, and 15-mm light nickel-titanium springs were activated to approximately 150 g on both sides of the arch. A sample size of n¼40 springs were tested for each of the three groups. Multivariate analysis of variance (a ¼ 0.05) was used to determine differences between treatment groups. Results: In the anterior segment, it was found that skeletal anchorage with power arms generated the largest retraction force (P , .001). The largest vertical forces on the unit were generated using skeletal anchorage, followed by skeletal anchorage with power arms, and finally dental anchorage. Power arms were found to generate larger intrusive forces on the lateral incisors and extrusive forces on the canines than on other groups. For the posterior anchorage unit, dental anchorage generated the largest protraction and palatal forces. Negligible forces were measured for both skeletal anchorage groups. Vertical forces on the posterior unit were minimal in all cases (,0.1 N). Conclusions: All retraction methods produced sufficient forces to retract the anterior teeth during en masse retraction. Skeletal anchorage reduced forces on the posterior teeth but introduced greater vertical forces on the anterior teeth. (Angle Orthod. 2017;87:549-555)

show abstract

Duration and Anchorage Management of Canine Retraction with Bodily Versus Tipping Mechanics

Cited by 58 publications

References 7 publications

Maxillary canine retraction with self-ligating and conventional brackets

Maxillary canine retraction with self-ligating and conventional brackets

Three-dimensional FEM analysis of stress distribution in dynamic maxillary canine movement

Initial forces experienced by the anterior and posterior teeth during dental-anchored or skeletal-anchored en masse retraction in vitro

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About