Maxillary Incisor Intrusion Using Two Conventional Intrusion Arches and Mini Implants: A Prospective Study

Shakti, Prateek; Ani, G Suja; Peter, Elbe; Haider, Khushtar; Kumar, Jitendra

doi:10.5005/jp-journals-10024-3136

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Previous study has claimed that conventional intrusion arches could achieve incisor intrusion of 1.5 to 2.7 mm. 18 Shakti et al 19 reported incisor intrusion of 1.4 mm (0.35 mm/month) in the Connecticut intrusion arch group and 1.66 mm (0.415 mm/month) in Burstone’s three-piece intrusion arch. Varlık et al 20 revealed that a utility arch could achieve a mandibular incisor intrusion of 2.6 ± 1.4 mm.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cone-beam computed tomographic evaluation of mandibular incisor alveolar bone changes for the intrusion arch technique: A retrospective cohort research

Lu,

Si,

Wang

et al. 2024

Korean J Orthod

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective Alveolar bone loss is a common adverse effect of intrusion treatment. Mandibular incisors are prone to dehiscence and fenestrations as they suffer from thinner alveolar bone thickness. Methods Thirty skeletal class II patients treated with mandibular intrusion arch therapy were included in this study. Lateral cephalograms and cone-beam computed tomography images were taken before treatment (T1) and immediately after intrusion arch removal (T2) to evaluate the tooth displacement and the alveolar bone changes. Pearson’s and Spearman’s correlation was used to identify risk factors of alveolar bone loss during the intrusion treatment. Results Deep overbite was successfully corrected ( P < 0.05), accompanied by mandibular incisor proclination ( P < 0.05). There were no statistically significant change in the true incisor intrusion ( P > 0.05). The labial and lingual vertical alveolar bone levels showed a significant decrease ( P < 0.05). The alveolar bone is thinning in the labial crestal area and lingual apical area ( P < 0.05); accompanied by thickening in the labial apical area ( P < 0.05). Proclined incisors, non-extraction treatment, and increased A point-nasion-B point (ANB) degree were positively correlated with alveolar bone loss. Conclusions While the mandibular intrusion arch effectively corrected the deep overbite, it did cause some unwanted incisor labial tipping/flaring. During the intrusion treatment, the alveolar bone underwent corresponding changes, which was thinning in the labial crestal area and thickening in the labial apical area vice versa. And increased axis change of incisors, non-extraction treatment, and increased ANB were identified as risk factors for alveolar bone loss in patients with mandibular intrusion therapy.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%