Long-term stability of maxillary group distalization with interradicular miniscrews in a patient with a Class II Division 2 malocclusion

Kuroda, Shingo; Hichijo, Natsuko; Sato, Mei; Mino, Akiko; Tamamura, Nagato; Iwata, Mitsuhiro; Tanaka, Eiji

doi:10.1016/j.ajodo.2015.07.045

Cited by 23 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…31 A recent case reported using buccal miniscrews for distalization and showed that the resultant occlusion was stable throughout a 5-year retention period. 32 However, long-term treatment stability should be evaluated in future studies in large samples.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A comparison of treatment effects of total arch distalization using modified C-palatal plate vs buccal miniscrews

Lee¹,

Abbas

Bayome

et al. 2017

The Angle Orthodontist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A comparison of treatment effects of total arch distalization using modified C-palatal plate vs buccal miniscrews

Lee¹,

Abbas

Bayome

et al. 2017

The Angle Orthodontist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The procedure also allows implant placement in an area of mature bone rather than in grafted bone, which may be a favorable factor for osseointegration. Kuroda (2016) [ 14 ] Japan 29 F 9(14,15,16,17,23,24,25,26,27) type-2:14 type-3:15,16,17,23,24,25,26,27 multibracket; TAD coil spring panoramic Interradicular miniscrews are useful for distalizing the maxillary dentition to correct class II malocclusion. With this new strategy, group distalization with miniscrews enables a simpler treatment with greater predictability.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In orthodontic clinics, clinicians may encounter MTTMS. In some cases, planning the distalization of molars or the maxillary dentition to correct type-II occlusion or to achieve a better anterior profile is preferred because this technique has the benefit of avoiding extraction and is reported to be one of the advantages of clear aligners [ 1 , 9 , 14 ]. In other cases, when closure of posterior spaces [ 15 – 17 ], tooth intrusion to create spaces for opposing prosthetics [ 18 , 19 ] or an alternative non-surgical sinus lift for implant sites [ 20 – 22 ] is required, orthodontists must implement MTTMS.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Knowledge of orthodontic tooth movement through the maxillary sinus: a systematic review

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundTo investigate the feasibility, safety and stability of current interventions for moving teeth through the maxillary sinus (MTTMS) by performing a systematic review of the literature.MethodsThe electronic databases PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, Web of Science, CBM, CNKI and SIGLE were searched without a language restriction. The primary outcomes were parameters related to orthodontic treatment, including orthodontic protocols, magnitude of forces, type of tooth movement, duration and rate of tooth movement, and remolding of alveolar bone and the maxillary sinus floor. The secondary outcomes were safety and stability, including root resorption, perforation of the sinus floor, loss of pulp vitality and periodontal health and relapse.ResultsNine case reports with 25 teeth were included and systematically analyzed. Fifty to two hundred g of force was applied to move teeth through the maxillary sinus. Bodily movement was accomplished, but initial tipping was observed in 7 cases. The rate was 0.6–0.7 mm/month for molar intrusion and 0.16–1.17 and 0.05–0.16 mm/month for mesial-distal movement of premolars and molars, respectively. Bone formation and remolding of the sinus floor occurred in 7 cases. Root resorption within 6 to 30 months was observed in 3 cases, while no cases of perforation of the sinus floor, loss of pulp vitality, periodontal health impairment or relapse were reported.ConclusionsAt the present stage, no evidence-based protocol could be recommended to guide MTTMS. The empirical application of constant and light to moderate forces (by TAD, segment and multibrackets) to slowly move teeth through or into the maxillary sinus in adults appears to be practical and secure. Bodily movement was accomplished, but teeth appear to be easily tipped initially, potentially resulting in root resorption. However, this conclusion should be interpreted with caution as the currently available evidence is based on only a few case reports or case series and longitudinal or controlled studies are lacking in this area.

show abstract

“…This was also shown by others using different appliances 8,36 and mechanics. 15,20 Distalizing tooth movement at the crown level alone includes distal tipping, which has been described as a major cause of substantial relapse. 37,38 Various skeletal anchorage mechanics have been shown to minimize distal tipping through distalization 14,17 and to even entirely control root movement.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…14,15 The introduction of miniscrew implants made skeletal anchorage more easily accessible for the orthodontist. 16 Miniscrew implants can be loaded directly 15,17 or through scaffolding 18,19 and have been shown to enable distal movement of the molars and premolars at the same time, 20,21 causing minimal distal tipping of the molars 21,22 which suggests high stability. However, throughout a lifetime, permanent molars exhibit mesial migration, 23 attributed to the anterior component of force, which is explained to result from mesial inclination of teeth.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Long-term stability of miniscrew anchored maxillary molar distalization in Class II treatment

Bechtold¹,

Park²,

Kim³

et al. 2020

The Angle Orthodontist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To investigate treatment stability of miniscrew-anchored maxillary distalization in Class II malocclusion. Materials and Methods This retrospective study included a distalization (n = 19) and a control (n = 19) group; a patient group with minor corrections served the control. Lateral cephalograms of 38 adult patients were taken before (T0), immediately after (T1), and 3–4 years after (T2) treatment. Horizontal and vertical movement and tipping of the maxillary first molars (U6) and central incisors (U1) were measured along with skeletal craniofacial parameters at three time points to compare the two groups regarding the achieved treatment effects and their stability. Results Total arch distalization therapy led to 4.2 mm of distal movement of U6 without distal crown tipping (0.6° of axis change) and 3.3° of occlusal plane steepening. Over an average retention period of 42 months, maxillary total arch distalization provided high stability of treatment results, showing the same amount of mesial movement (0.7 mm) as the control group. Conclusions In Class II treatment, miniscrew-anchored maxillary total arch distalization can provide stable distal movement of the maxillary first molars and central incisors.

show abstract

Long-term stability of maxillary group distalization with interradicular miniscrews in a patient with a Class II Division 2 malocclusion

Cited by 23 publications

References 19 publications

A comparison of treatment effects of total arch distalization using modified C-palatal plate vs buccal miniscrews

A comparison of treatment effects of total arch distalization using modified C-palatal plate vs buccal miniscrews

Knowledge of orthodontic tooth movement through the maxillary sinus: a systematic review

Long-term stability of miniscrew anchored maxillary molar distalization in Class II treatment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About