Tooth movement rate and anchorage lost during canine retraction: <i>A maxillary and mandibular comparison</i>

Monini, André da Costa; Gandini, Luiz Gonzaga; Vianna, Alexandre Protásio; Martins, Renato Parsekian; Jacob, Helder B.

doi:10.2319/061318-443.1

Cited by 16 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 41 publications

(65 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In general, the rate of tooth movement in the upper was slightly higher, but with a statistically non-significant difference. Our results agreed with Aslan et al (39) but were contradictory to Monini et al (41) who showed a higher maxillary rate of canine retraction.…”

Section: Table (2) Comparison Between the Four Studied Groups Accordi...supporting

confidence: 85%

Comparison of Upper and Lower Canine Retraction Rates Assisted by Flapless Laser Corticotomy.

BAKR,

Nadim,

Elkadi

2024

Dental Science Updates

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: One of the most frequent issues in extraction cases is the prolonged duration of orthodontic therapy and the slow rate of canine retraction. Aim: This secondary analysis study aimed to compare the rate of canine retraction in upper and lower canines facilitated with Flapless Laser corticotomy (FLC). Materials and Methods: The study included 56 canines from 14 patients (2 males /12 females) with a mean age of (20.4±2.5) years diagnosed with bimaxillary dentoalveolar protrusion and treated with 4 premolars extraction with upper and lower fixed appliances. The intervention was applied in a split-mouth fashion, so before commencing the study, 2 random computer-generated lists with a 1:1 allocation ratio were obtained to detect the side of intervention, these lists were concealed in opaque envelopes until the time of intervention. All participants were allocated into 2 groups, I-(Maxillary canines: which were divided into two subgroups A. Control, B. FLC) and II-(Mandibular canines: which were divided into two subgroups A. Control B. FLC). FLC was applied on the experimental sides before canine retraction by performing 6 holes with 3 mm of depth into the alveolar bone on both mesial and distal sides of all canines, then canines' retraction was performed using closed-coil springs to obtain a force of 150 gm while anchorage was augmented indirectly with TADs. The rate of canine retraction was assessed at T0, T1, T2, and T3 (just before, 1 month, 2 months, and 3 months after retraction), using 3-Dimentional digital casts. Only the statistical analysis expert was blinded. Results: The results showed a statistically non-significant difference between all groups (upper and lower flapless laser corticotomy and control) in the change in canine retraction distance and monthly rate of Canine retraction. Conclusion: There were neither statistically nor clinically significant differences between upper and lower canine retraction rates either by conventional method or assisted by FLC performed in this study.

show abstract

Section: Table (2) Comparison Between the Four Studied Groups Accordi...supporting

confidence: 85%

Comparison of Upper and Lower Canine Retraction Rates Assisted by Flapless Laser Corticotomy.

BAKR,

Nadim,

Elkadi

2024

Dental Science Updates

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…6 This also does not agree with a similar study by Monini et al in 2019 where canine retraction was done using conventional anchorage and the maxillary canines showed a greater rate of tooth movement than the mandibular canines. 7 The difference in retraction rate in high angle and low angle cases is statistically insignificant as per the paired ttest done in comparison between TADs in high and low angle cases.…”

Section: Retractionmentioning

confidence: 86%

Comparative evaluation of four types of orthodontic miniscrews in high angle and low angle cases during en mass retraction – A 6 months follow up in vivo study

Mukunthan,

Parimanoharan,

Karthikeyan

2024

IJODR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

: To determine the stability and retraction achieved after 6 months of placement of four types of Orthodontic Miniscrews (TADs) in low angle and high angle cases during en masse anterior retraction.: 4 different interradicular miniscrews [FavAnchor (Favourite Supplies), VectorTAS (Ormco), JJ Orthodontics, SK Surgicals] of similar dimensions were placed on the 4 quadrants of maxilla and mandible in 20 patients (10 High Angle and 10 Low Angle) undergoing all I premolar extraction requiring group-A Anchorage and retraction was done using 0.019 x 0.025 Stainless Steel archwire closed coil NiTi springs for 6 months. OPG and Lateral cephalogram was taken before and immediately after 6 months of loading. The retraction, stability and maxillary anterior intrusion achieved by the miniscrews was assessed by measuring the distance of movement occurred in 6 months between marked landmarks before and after retraction.: The most efficient miniscrew in high angle cases was found to be Vector TAS (Retraction=6.11±0.202mm, Displacement=1.40±0.37mm) followed by Favanchor (Displacement=6.00±0.41mm, 1.25±0.44mm) in both maxilla and mandible. Similarly, in low angle cases it was Favanchor (Retraction=6.04±0.24mm, Displacement=0.99±0.46mm) followed by Vector TAS (Retraction=5.91±0.36mm, Displacement=.095±0.35mm) in both maxilla and mandible. There is miniscrew failure with a significant percentage of 1.87% excluding which, there was no statistic difference in the displacement in High angle as well as Low angle cases, whereas, with the inclusion of failure, there is statistically significant difference in the stability. The least efficient in retraction and stability were SK Surgicals and JJ Orthodontics.: There is significant difference in the stability and retraction among the four miniscrews used in High angle and Low angle as well as Maxilla and Mandible owing to the density of the bone at the implant site and the soft tissue present apart from the material and make of individual miniscrew systems.

show abstract

“…Monini et al . [ 36 37 ] employed a vertical reference line perpendicular to the occlusal plane on both sides of oblique lateral cephalometric radiographs. The canine movement was indicated by the horizontal distance between the vertical reference line and the canine cusp point.…”

Section: Methods Of Measuring Distal Canine Movementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Methods of measuring distal canine movement and rotation- A review

Nahidh¹,

Yassir²

2023

Journal of Orthodontic Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article provides an overview of the various methods for measuring distal canine movement and rotation during retraction. Various databases, including PubMed Central, Science Direct, Wiley Online Library, the Cochrane Library, Textbooks, Google Scholar, and Research Gate, and a manual search up until September 2022, were used to search for various methods of measuring distal canine movement and rotation during retraction. After excluding the duplicate articles, the papers explaining these techniques were included. Four significant techniques were identified. The digital method with 3D superimposition is the safest, most accurate, and most accessible of the methods reviewed.

show abstract

Tooth movement rate and anchorage lost during canine retraction: A maxillary and mandibular comparison

Cited by 16 publications

References 41 publications

Comparison of Upper and Lower Canine Retraction Rates Assisted by Flapless Laser Corticotomy.

Comparison of Upper and Lower Canine Retraction Rates Assisted by Flapless Laser Corticotomy.

Comparative evaluation of four types of orthodontic miniscrews in high angle and low angle cases during en mass retraction – A 6 months follow up in vivo study

Methods of measuring distal canine movement and rotation- A review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About