scholarly journals Comparison Of Three-Dimensional Anchorage Loss In En-Masse Retraction And Two Step Retraction During Orthodontic Treatment- A Cephalometric Study

2021 ◽  
pp. 3362-3367
Author(s):  
Mukul Shetty ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Orthodontic Treatment ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Cephalometric Study ◽  
Anchorage Loss ◽  
En Masse Retraction

scholarly journals Effects of Skeletally Supported Anterior en Masse Retraction with Varied Lever Arm Lengths and Locations in Lingual Orthodontic Treatment: A 3D Finite Element Study

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
pp. 1-12
Author(s):  
Mohammad Ghannam ◽  
Beste Kamiloğlu
Keyword(s):  
Finite Element ◽  
Orthodontic Treatment ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Torque Control ◽  
Finite Element Models ◽  
3D Finite Element ◽  
Force Application ◽  
Lever Arm ◽  
Retraction Force ◽  
En Masse Retraction

Objective. This study is aimed at analyzing different points of force application during miniscrew supported en masse retraction of the anterior maxillary teeth to identify the best line of action of force in lingual orthodontic treatment. Materials and Methods. Three-dimensional (3D) finite element models were created to stimulate en masse retraction with different heights and positions of the miniscrew and lever arm to change the force application points; a 150 g retraction force was applied from the miniscrew to the lever arms, and the initial tooth displacements were analyzed. Results. Lingual crown tipping and occlusal crown extrusion were seen at all heights and positions of the miniscrew and lever arm, but when the miniscrew height was at 8 mm and the power arm was located between the lateral incisors and canines, these tipping patterns were less than those obtained with a 4.5 mm high miniscrew and a lever arm located distal to the canines. Conclusion. All miniscrew heights and lever arm positions showed initial lingual crown tipping and labial root tipping with occlusal crown extrusion. However, the 8 mm miniscrew height and the lever arm located between the lateral incisor and canine showed fewer amounts of these tipping patterns than a 4.5 mm miniscrew height and lever arm located distal to the canines. Therefore, this could be the preferred point of force application during en masse retraction in lingual treatment with additional torque control methods.

scholarly journals Does anchorage loss differ with 0.018-inch and 0.022-inch slot bracket systems?

2019 ◽  
Vol 89 (4) ◽  
pp. 605-610
Author(s):  
Yassir A. Yassir ◽  
Grant T. McIntyre ◽  
Ahmed M. El-Angbawi ◽  
David R. Bearn
Keyword(s):  
Orthodontic Treatment ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Total Sample ◽  
Fixed Appliance ◽  
The Third ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Maxillary Molar ◽  
Slot Size ◽  
Baseline Characteristics ◽  
Anchorage Loss

ABSTRACT Objectives: To compare maxillary first molar anchorage loss between 0.018-inch and 0.022-inch slot fixed appliance systems. Materials and Methods: Patients requiring bilateral maxillary premolar extractions (n = 74) within a randomized clinical trial comparing the effectiveness of 0.018-inch and 0.022-inch slot MBT bracket systems (3M-Unitek, Monrovia, Calif) were included. Three-dimensional pre- and posttreatment digital models were landmarked and measured (R700 scanner and OrthoAnalyzer software, 3Shape, Copenhagen, Denmark). Anteroposterior position of the first molars was measured using the third medial rugae point as a reference. Anchorage loss (AL) represented the subtraction of the posttreatment distance from the pretreatment distance for both anchorage loss right (ALR) and left (ALL) sides. The values were then compared using a two-way analysis of variance. Results: There were 41 and 33 cases for the 0.018-inch and 0.022-inch bracket slot systems, respectively. The baseline characteristics were similar between groups, except for the presence or absence of anchorage devices (P = .050). For the total sample: 0.018-inch ALR = 3.86 mm, ALL = 3.30 mm and 0.022-inch ALR = 3.73 mm, ALL = 3.47 mm (P = .970). There was also no significant difference between the 0.018-inch and 0.022-inch groups when subjects with anchorage devices were excluded (P = .383). Conclusions: Bracket slot size does not influence maxillary molar anchorage loss during orthodontic treatment.

scholarly journals Comparison of anterior retraction and anchorage control between en masse retraction and two-step retraction: A randomized prospective clinical trial

2018 ◽  
Vol 89 (2) ◽  
pp. 190-199 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patricia Pigato Schneider ◽  
Luiz Gonzaga Gandini Júnior ◽  
André da Costa Monini ◽  
Ary dos Santos Pinto ◽  
Ki Beom Kim
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Treatment Group ◽  
Secondary Outcome ◽  
Space Closure ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Maxilla And Mandible ◽  
Anchorage Loss ◽  
Bimaxillary Protrusion ◽  
Best Fit ◽  
En Masse Retraction

ABSTRACT Objectives: The purpose of this two-arm parallel trial was to compare en masse (ER) and two-step retraction (TSR) during space closure. Materials and Methods: Forty-eight adult patients with bimaxillary protrusion who were planned for treatment with extraction of four first premolars were enrolled. All patients were randomly allocated in a 1:1 ratio to either the ER (n = 24) group or the TSR (n = 24) group. The main outcome was the amount of posterior anchorage loss in the molars and the retraction of the incisors between ER and TSR; the difference in incisor and molar inclination was a secondary outcome. Lateral cephalometric radiographs and oblique cephalometric radiographs at 45° were taken before retraction (T1) and after space closure (T2). Cephalograms were digitized and superimposed on the anatomic best fit of the maxilla and mandible by one operator who was blinded to the treatment group. Results: Neither incisor nor molar crown movements showed any significant differences between the ER and TSR. There were no significant differences in the tipping of incisors and molars between the two groups. Conclusions: No significant differences existed in the amount of retraction of incisors and anchorage loss of molars between ER and TSR. Changes in incisor and molar tipping were similar, with the crowns showing more movement than the apex.

scholarly journals Three-dimensional analysis of the physiologic drift of adjacent teeth following maxillary first premolar extractions

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Fei Teng ◽  
Fei-Yu Du ◽  
Hui-Zhong Chen ◽  
Ruo-Ping Jiang ◽  
Tian-Min Xu
Keyword(s):  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Posterior Teeth ◽  
Fixed Appliance ◽  
Premolar Extraction ◽  
Negative Effect ◽  
Vertical Changes ◽  
Anchorage Loss ◽  
Drift Models ◽  
To Receive ◽  
Positive Effect

Abstract We assessed the three-dimensional (3D) pattern of the physiologic drift of the remaining adjacent teeth after premolar extraction due to orthodontic reasons and the associated factors. Data were collected from 45 patients aged 17.04 ± 5.14 years who were scheduled to receive a fixed appliance after maxillary premolar extraction. Seventy-five drift models were obtained and digitalized via 3D scanning. The average physiologic drift duration was 81.66 ± 70.03 days. Angular and linear changes in the first molars, second premolars, and canines were measured using the 3D method. All the examined teeth had tipped and moved towards the extraction space, leading to space decreases. Posterior teeth primarily exhibited significant mesial tipping and displacement, without rotation or vertical changes. All canine variables changed, including distal inward rotation and extrusion. The physiologic drift tended to slow over time. Age had a limited negative effect on the mesial drift of posterior teeth, whereas crowding had a limited positive effect on canine drift. Thus, the mesial drift of molars after premolar extraction may lead to molar anchorage loss, particularly among younger patients. The pattern of the physiologic drift of maxillary canines can help relieve crowding and facilitate labially ectopic canine alignment, whereas canine drift is accelerated by more severe crowding.

scholarly journals Highly variable rate of orthodontic tooth movement measured by a novel 3D method correlates with gingival inflammation

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marc A. de Gouyon Matignon de Pontouraude ◽  
Johannes W. Von den Hoff ◽  
Frank Baan ◽  
Robin Bruggink ◽  
Marjon Bloemen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Biological Markers ◽  
Orthodontic Treatment ◽  
Tooth Movement ◽  
Gingival Crevicular Fluid ◽  
Contact Point ◽  
Anterior Segment ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Orthodontic Tooth Movement ◽  
Large Individual ◽  
Gingival Inflammation

Abstract Objectives Individual orthodontic treatment duration is hard to predict. Individual biological factors are amongst factors influencing individual rate of orthodontically induced tooth movement (OTM). The study aim is to determine the rate of OTM by a novel 3D method and investigate parameters that may predict the rate of tooth movement. Materials and methods In this prospective cohort study, rate of OTM was determined from 90 three-dimensional intra-oral scans in 15 patients (aged 12–15) undergoing orthodontic treatment. For each patient, intra-oral scans were taken every week for up to 6 weeks (T0–T5). The teeth were segmented from the scans and the scans were superimposed on the palatal rugae. The rate of OTM was calculated for each tooth. Other parameters were gingival inflammation, contact-point displacement and the biological markers, matrix metalloproteinases (MMP), MMP-9 and MMP-2 in gingival crevicular fluid (GCF). Results Our study showed a high variation in the rate of OTM, varying from 0.15 to 1.24 mm/week. Teeth in the anterior segment tended to move more compared with the posterior segment. The contact point displacement and gingival inflammation varied greatly amongst the patients. The MMPs measured did not correlate with tooth movement. However, the gingival inflammation index showed a significant correlation with OTM. Future studies should include other biological markers related to bone-remodeling. Conclusion This novel and efficient 3D method is suitable for measuring OTM and showed large individual variation in rate of OTM. Clinical relevance Patients show different rates of OTM. The rate of OTM in an individual patient can provide guidance in timing of follow-up appointments.

scholarly journals Comparison of Rate of Canine Retraction and Secondary Outcomes Associated With Conventional Fixed Orthodontic Treatment and Minimally Invasive Techniques (MOPs): A Randomized Control Trial

2020 ◽  
pp. 030157422096350
Author(s):  
Ajit Vikram Parihar ◽  
Shivam Verma ◽  
TP Chaturvedi ◽  
Naresh Kumar ◽  
A Kavin Prasanth ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Orthodontic Treatment ◽  
Tooth Movement ◽  
Root Resorption ◽  
Control Group ◽  
P Value ◽  
Pain Level ◽  
Canine Retraction ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Secondary Outcomes ◽  
Anchorage Loss

Introduction: The objective of the study was to assess the rate of canine retraction and secondary outcomes associated with conventional fixed orthodontic treatment (CFO) and CFO with micro-osteoperforation (CFO + MOP), that is, anchorage loss, root resorption, vitality of tooth, pain and discomfort level during the procedure. Methods: A total of 16 patients with Class II Division 1 malocclusion who required upper first premolar extraction with lower non-extraction/single incisor extraction were divided into the test group (MOP) and positive control group (CFO + MOP) for a split-mouth study. Both maxillary canines were retracted with nickel–titanium (NiTi) closed coil springs. Patients were reviewed after 24 hours, 7 days, 28 days, and 4, 8, and 16 weeks to assess the rate of tooth movement, anchorage loss, root resorption, vitality of tooth, pain and discomfort level. Results: There was a statistically significant difference in the rate of tooth movement between the CFO and CFO + MOP groups after the first 4 weeks ( P-value = .026), whereas no statistically significant difference was observed at 8, 12, and 16 weeks ( P-value = .33, .99, and .08, respectively). In the CFO group, there was no statistically significant difference in tooth movement between different time intervals ( P-value > .05). There was no significant difference in root resorption between the groups. The pain level was higher in the MOP group in the first 24 hours ( P-value < .05) after the procedure. Later on, the difference in pain level between the groups was not significant ( P-value > .05). The vitality of retracted canines in both groups was healthy. Conclusion: The study recommends that the CFO + MOP procedure has substantial potential to be used as an adjunct to the routine mechanotherapy for faster tooth movement, as it may reduce the treatment time by half in the first 4 weeks after the MOP procedure. There are no potential differences in anchorage loss, tipping, vitality, and apical and lateral root resorption between the CFO and CFO + MOP groups. This trial was registered at Clinical Trial Registry, India.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document