En-masse protraction of mandibular posterior teeth into missing mandibular lateral incisor spaces using a fixed functional appliance

Chhibber, Aditya; Upadhyay, Madhur

doi:10.1016/j.ajodo.2015.10.034

American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics

2016

DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2015.10.034

|View full text |Cite|

En-masse protraction of mandibular posterior teeth into missing mandibular lateral incisor spaces using a fixed functional appliance

Aditya Chhibber

Madhur Upadhyay

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...

Citation Types

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Year Published

2019

2024

Publication Types

Select...

Article2

Relationship

Self Cite0

Independent2

Authors

Journals

Cited by 2 publications

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

Mandibular molar protraction: A comparison between fixed functional appliances and temporary anchorage devices

Alshehri,

Abu Arqub,

Betlej

et al. 2024

Orthod Craniofacial Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionThis study aimed to compare the efficiency of temporary anchorage devices (TADs) and fixed functional appliances (FFAs) for mandibular molar protraction.MethodsOrthodontic records of 1050 consecutively treated patients with molar protraction were screened. Thirty‐six records (22 females and 14 males; mean age, 17.4 years) were divided into two groups: TAD (21 subjects with 25 edentulous spaces) and FFA (15 subjects with 24 edentulous spaces). The primary outcome measure was the efficiency of protraction [magnitude and time required for protraction (rate) and anchor loss (AL)]. The secondary outcomes involved measuring the type of tooth movement (TOTM), external apical root resorption (EARR), alveolar bone height change (ABHC), alveolar bone width change (ABWC) and appliance failure.ResultsThe rate of tooth movement was significantly higher for FFAs (0.83 ± 0.35 mm/month) versus TADs (0.49 ± 0.2 mm/month) (P = .005). Total treatment duration was less for FFAs (34.78 ± 8.1 months) versus TADs (47.72 ± 13.94 months) (P = .002). TOTM was similar for both (P = .909). EARR was 1.42 ± 1.38 mm for TAD and 1.25 ± 0.88 mm for FFA (P = .81). ABHC increased in the FFA group (1.01 ± 3.62 mm) and decreased for the TAD group (0.68 ± 1.66 mm). ABWC increased for both TAD (1.81 ± 1.73 mm) and FFA (1.75 ± 1.35 mm). The failure rate was 50% for FFAs and 33% for TADs.ConclusionsBoth systems provided translation of lower molars with comparable anchorage control. However, FFAs were more efficient than TADs for lower molar protraction.

show abstract

Mandibular molar protraction: A comparison between fixed functional appliances and temporary anchorage devices

Alshehri,

Abu Arqub,

Betlej

et al. 2024

Orthod Craniofacial Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Envisioning Post-treatment Occlusions after Space Closure Using Temporary Skeletal Anchorage Devices

Baik¹,

Sugawara²,

Chun³

et al. 2019

Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.

Contact Info

customersupport@researchsolutions.com

10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614

Henderson, NV 89052, USA

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Blog Terms and Conditions API Terms Privacy Policy Contact Cookie Preferences Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information

Made with 💙 for researchers

Part of the Research Solutions Family.

En-masse protraction of mandibular posterior teeth into missing mandibular lateral incisor spaces using a fixed functional appliance

Cited by 2 publications

References 23 publications

Mandibular molar protraction: A comparison between fixed functional appliances and temporary anchorage devices

Mandibular molar protraction: A comparison between fixed functional appliances and temporary anchorage devices

Envisioning Post-treatment Occlusions after Space Closure Using Temporary Skeletal Anchorage Devices

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About