scholarly journals Efficacy of Er,Cr Laser incision Corticotomy in Rapid Maxillary Canine Retraction: A Split-Mouth Randomized Clinical Trial

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 442-449
Author(s):  
Majid Mahmoudzadeh ◽  
Banafshe Poormoradi ◽  
Sara Alijani ◽  
Maryam Farhadian ◽  
Azadeh Kazemisaleh
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trial ◽  
Maxillary Canine ◽  
Canine Retraction ◽  
Laser Incision

Efficacy of elastic memory chains versus nickel–titanium coil springs in canine retraction: A two-center split-mouth randomized clinical trial

2017 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 561-574
Author(s):  
Mashallah Khanemasjedi ◽  
Mehrnaz Moradinejad ◽  
Pedram Javidi ◽  
Ozra Niknam ◽  
Nima Haghighat Jahromi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trial ◽  
Nickel Titanium ◽  
Canine Retraction

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

2019 ◽  
Vol 89 (4) ◽  
pp. 559-565 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andre da C. Monini ◽  
Luiz G. Gandini ◽  
Alexandre P. Vianna ◽  
Renato P. Martins ◽  
Helder B. Jacob
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trial ◽  
Tooth Movement ◽  
The Other ◽  
Movement Rate ◽  
Canine Retraction ◽  
Lower Canine ◽  
Anchorage Loss ◽  
Tooth Movement Rate

ABSTRACT Objectives: To investigate the canine retraction rate and anchorage loss during canine retraction using self-ligating (SL) brackets and conventional (CV) brackets. Differences between maxillary and mandibular rates were computed. Materials and Methods: Twenty-five subjects requiring four first premolar extractions were enrolled in this split-mouth, randomized clinical trial. Each patient had one upper canine and one lower canine bonded randomly with SL brackets and the other canines with CV brackets but never on the same side. NiTi retraction springs were used to retract canines (100 g force). Maxillary and mandibular superimpositions, using cephalometric 45° oblique radiographs at the beginning and at the end of canine retraction, were used to calculate the changes and rates during canine retraction. Paired t-tests were used to compare side and jaw effects. Results: The SL and CV brackets did not show differences related to monthly canine movement in the maxilla (0.71 mm and 0.72 mm, respectively) or in the mandible (0.54 mm and 0.60 mm, respectively). Rates of anchorage loss in the maxilla and in the mandible also did not show differences between the SL and CV brackets. Maxillary canines showed greater amount of tooth movement per month than mandibular canines (0.71 mm and 0.57 mm, respectively). Conclusions: SL brackets did not show faster canine retraction compared with CV brackets nor less anchorage loss. The maxillary canines showed a greater rate of tooth movement than the mandibular canines; however, no difference in anchorage loss between the maxillary and mandibular posterior segments during canine retraction was found.

scholarly journals The effects of corticotomy and piezocision in orthodontic canine retraction: a randomized controlled clinical trial

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Larissa Salgado da Matta Cid Pinto Fernandes ◽  
Daniel Santos Fonseca Figueiredo ◽  
Dauro Douglas Oliveira ◽  
Ricardo Gontijo Houara ◽  
Wellington José Rody ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Bone Remodeling ◽  
Distinct Pattern ◽  
Secondary Outcome ◽  
Controlled Clinical Trial ◽  
Random Allocation ◽  
Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial ◽  
Maxillary Canine ◽  
Canine Retraction ◽  
Randomized Controlled

Abstract Background The aims of this study were to evaluate the efficacy of alveolar corticotomy (AC) and piezocision (PZ) in accelerating maxillary canine retraction, and their effects on multiple bone remodeling expression in gingival crevicular fluid (GCF). A split-mouth, randomized controlled clinical trial was performed at the Department of Orthodontics of Pontifical Catholic University of Minas Gerais, Brazil. Eligibility criteria included orthodontic need for first maxillary premolars extractions, followed by canine retraction. Fifty-one adult patients were recruited and randomly assigned to 3 groups (allocation ratio 1:1:1). Random allocation of surgical or control interventions to each side of the maxillary arch was also conducted: G1 − AC × Control, G2 − PZ × Control, and G3 − AC × PZ. Both the definition of the group and the decision of the experimental or control sides were randomized by the software. Intraoral digital scans were performed before, 7 and 14 days after the beginning of canine retraction, and subsequently, at every 14 days until a maximum period of 6 months. GCF samples were collected before, and 1, 2, 4, 8, and 12 weeks. The primary outcome consisted in the cumulative distal movement of the canines and was measured by digital model superimposition. The secondary outcome consisted in GCF bone remodeling samples that were quantified in a multiplex immunoassay. The measurements examinator was properly blinded. Results Forty-seven patients, 19 males and 28 females, were analyzed (mean age 20.72, SD = 6.66, range 15 to 38). Statistically significant differences in canine distal movement between AC and control in G1 were not observed (p > 0.05). In G2, PZ showed lower cumulative incisal and cervical measurements than control from the 2nd to the 24th week (p < 0.05). In G3, PZ showed a lower cumulative incisal and cervical measurements than AC from the16th to the 24th week (p < 0.05). In all groups, differences on biomarkers expression occurred at specific timepoints (p < 0.05), but a distinct pattern was not observed. Conclusions AC and PZ were not effective to accelerate maxillary canine retraction and did not induce a distinct pattern of biomarker expression. Trial registration NCT03089996. Registered 24 March 2017 - Registered.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document