Erratum to “Efficacy of elastic memory chains versus nickel–titanium coil springs in canine retraction : A two-center split-mouth randomized clinical trial” [International Orthodontics 2017 ;15 :561–74]

2018 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 215
Author(s):  
Mashallah Khanemasjedi ◽  
Mehrnaz Moradinejad ◽  
Pedram Javidi ◽  
Ozra Niknam ◽  
Nima Haghighat Jahromi ◽  
...  
2017 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 561-574
Author(s):  
Mashallah Khanemasjedi ◽  
Mehrnaz Moradinejad ◽  
Pedram Javidi ◽  
Ozra Niknam ◽  
Nima Haghighat Jahromi ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 442-449
Author(s):  
Majid Mahmoudzadeh ◽  
Banafshe Poormoradi ◽  
Sara Alijani ◽  
Maryam Farhadian ◽  
Azadeh Kazemisaleh

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

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.


2018 ◽  
Vol 88 (3) ◽  
pp. 348-354 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barrett Nordstrom ◽  
Toshihiro Shoji ◽  
W. Cameron Anderson ◽  
Henry W. Fields ◽  
F. Michael Beck ◽  
...  

ABSTRACT Objectives: The purpose of this prospective, double-blind, randomized clinical trial was to compare the clinical efficiency of nickel-titanium (NiTi) and niobium-titanium-tantalum-zirconium (TiNbTaZr) archwires during initial orthodontic alignment. Materials and Methods: All subjects (ages between 12 and 20 years) underwent nonextraction treatment using 0.022-inch brackets. All patients were randomized into two groups for initial alignment with 0.016-inch NiTi archwires (n = 14), or with 0.016-inch TiNbTaZr archwires (n = 14). Digital scans were taken during the course of treatment and were used to compare the improvement in Little's Irregularity Index and the changes in intercanine and intermolar widths. Results: There was approximately a 27% reduction in crowding during the first month with the use of 0.016-inch TiNbTaZr (Gummetal) wire, and an additional 25% decrease in crowding was observed during the next month. There was no significant difference between the two treatment groups in the decrease in irregularity over time (P = .29). There was no significant difference between the two groups in the changes in intercanine and intermolar width (P = .80). Conclusions: It can be concluded that Gummetal wires and conventional NiTi wires possess a similar ability to align teeth, and Gummetal wires have additional advantages over conventional NiTi, such as formability and use in patients with nickel allergy.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document