Comparison of two treatment protocols for intrusion and retraction of maxillary anterior teeth using mini-implants : A prospective clinical trial.

IF 1.3 4区 医学 Q3 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
A Sumathi Felicita, Shabeena Abdul Khader
{"title":"Comparison of two treatment protocols for intrusion and retraction of maxillary anterior teeth using mini-implants : A prospective clinical trial.","authors":"A Sumathi Felicita, Shabeena Abdul Khader","doi":"10.1007/s00056-022-00394-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The primary objective of this study was to compare the magnitude of incisor intrusion and retraction between two different treatment protocols and the secondary objective was to evaluate overall treatment effects.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Thirty-four patients with proclined upper anterior teeth, increased overbite, and incisal show were randomly assigned to two treatment groups (G1 and G2). Upper first premolar extractions were performed in all cases. In G1, space closure was performed with conventional straight-wire friction mechanics with NiTi (nickel titanium) coil springs placed on 0.019″ × 0.025″ stainless steel wires in a 0.022 slot system with an additional intrusive force via a midline mini-implant. In G2, NiTi coil springs were placed from buccal mini-implants placed onto 0.016″ × 0.022″ SS wires in a 0.022 slot system bilaterally. Lateral cephalograms and study models taken at the beginning and at the end of 6 months of treatment were assessed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Both groups showed a statistically significant mild maxillary incisor intrusion, reduction in overjet, overbite, incisal show and a reduction in lower anterior facial height. There was a mild intrusion of the maxillary first permanent molar in G2 (not significant). Mesial movement of the maxillary first permanent molar was noted in G1 but distal movement occurred in G2. Constriction of the entire maxillary arch was noted in G1, whereas constriction was seen in the molar region only in G2. Root resorption was noticed in both groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Both groups produced comparable results. Except for molar control, all the results obtained were comparable between the two mechanics. Application of an intrusive force in the midline may be beneficial in patients treated with conventional straight-wire mechanics to treat increased overbite when anchorage requirement is not high.</p>","PeriodicalId":54776,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics-Fortschritte Der Kieferorthopadie","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics-Fortschritte Der Kieferorthopadie","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00056-022-00394-7","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/4/28 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: The primary objective of this study was to compare the magnitude of incisor intrusion and retraction between two different treatment protocols and the secondary objective was to evaluate overall treatment effects.

Materials and methods: Thirty-four patients with proclined upper anterior teeth, increased overbite, and incisal show were randomly assigned to two treatment groups (G1 and G2). Upper first premolar extractions were performed in all cases. In G1, space closure was performed with conventional straight-wire friction mechanics with NiTi (nickel titanium) coil springs placed on 0.019″ × 0.025″ stainless steel wires in a 0.022 slot system with an additional intrusive force via a midline mini-implant. In G2, NiTi coil springs were placed from buccal mini-implants placed onto 0.016″ × 0.022″ SS wires in a 0.022 slot system bilaterally. Lateral cephalograms and study models taken at the beginning and at the end of 6 months of treatment were assessed.

Results: Both groups showed a statistically significant mild maxillary incisor intrusion, reduction in overjet, overbite, incisal show and a reduction in lower anterior facial height. There was a mild intrusion of the maxillary first permanent molar in G2 (not significant). Mesial movement of the maxillary first permanent molar was noted in G1 but distal movement occurred in G2. Constriction of the entire maxillary arch was noted in G1, whereas constriction was seen in the molar region only in G2. Root resorption was noticed in both groups.

Conclusion: Both groups produced comparable results. Except for molar control, all the results obtained were comparable between the two mechanics. Application of an intrusive force in the midline may be beneficial in patients treated with conventional straight-wire mechanics to treat increased overbite when anchorage requirement is not high.

使用微型种植体对上颌前牙内收和后缩两种治疗方案的比较 :前瞻性临床试验。
研究目的本研究的主要目的是比较两种不同治疗方案的切牙内收和后缩程度,次要目的是评估总体治疗效果:34名上前牙前倾、咬合过度和切牙外露的患者被随机分配到两个治疗组(G1和G2)。所有病例都进行了上第一前磨牙拔除术。G1 组采用传统的直丝摩擦力学进行间隙封闭,镍钛(NiTi)螺旋弹簧放置在 0.019 英寸 × 0.025 英寸的不锈钢丝上,0.022 槽系统通过中线微型种植体施加额外的侵入力。在 G2 中,镍钛螺旋弹簧从颊侧微型种植体植入,置于 0.016″ × 0.022″ 不锈钢丝上,双侧均为 0.022 插槽系统。对治疗开始和结束 6 个月时拍摄的侧位头影和研究模型进行了评估:两组患者的上颌切牙轻度内陷、过咬合、过咬合和切迹均有所减少,面部前下方高度也有所降低。G2 组的上颌第一恒磨牙有轻度内陷(无显著性)。在 G1 中发现上颌第一恒磨牙向中间移动,但在 G2 中发现上颌第一恒磨牙向远端移动。G1 发现整个上颌牙弓收缩,而 G2 仅在磨牙区发现收缩。结论:结论:两组结果相当。结论:两组结果相当,除臼齿控制外,两组的所有结果都相当。在锚固要求不高的情况下,在中线施加侵入力可能有利于采用传统直丝机制治疗咬合过度的患者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
64
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics provides orthodontists and dentists who are also actively interested in orthodontics, whether in university clinics or private practice, with highly authoritative and up-to-date information based on experimental and clinical research. The journal is one of the leading publications for the promulgation of the results of original work both in the areas of scientific and clinical orthodontics and related areas. All articles undergo peer review before publication. The German Society of Orthodontics (DGKFO) also publishes in the journal important communications, statements and announcements.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信