The Angle orthodontist · 2018
Effects of different force magnitudes on corticotomy-assisted orthodontic tooth movement in rats.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Kraiwattanapong Kriangkrai, Samruajbenjakun Bancha
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: To investigate the effects of light and heavy forces with corticotomy on tooth movement rate, alveolar bone response, and root resorption in a rat model.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The right and left sides of 40 male Wistar rats were randomly assigned using the split-mouth design to two groups: light force with corticotomy (LF) and heavy force with corticotomy (HF). Tooth movement was performed on the maxillary first molars using a nickel-titanium closed-coil spring delivering either 10 g (light force) or 50 g (heavy force). Tooth movement and alveolar bone response were assessed by micro-computed tomography (micro-CT) at day 0 as the baseline and on days 7, 14, 21, and 28. Root resorption was examined by histomorphometric analysis at day 28.
RESULTS: Micro-CT analysis showed a significantly greater tooth movement in the HF group at days 7 and 14 but no difference in bone volume fraction at any of the observed periods. Histomorphometric analysis found no significant difference in root resorption between the LF and HF groups at day 28.
CONCLUSIONS: Heavy force with corticotomy increased tooth movement at days 7 and 14 but did not show any difference in alveolar bone change or root resorption.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The right and left sides of 40 male Wistar rats were randomly assigned using the split-mouth design to two groups: light force with corticotomy (LF) and heavy force with corticotomy (HF). Tooth movement was performed on the maxillary first molars using a nickel-titanium closed-coil spring delivering either 10 g (light force) or 50 g (heavy force). Tooth movement and alveolar bone response were assessed by micro-computed tomography (micro-CT) at day 0 as the baseline and on days 7, 14, 21, and 28. Root resorption was examined by histomorphometric analysis at day 28.
RESULTS: Micro-CT analysis showed a significantly greater tooth movement in the HF group at days 7 and 14 but no difference in bone volume fraction at any of the observed periods. Histomorphometric analysis found no significant difference in root resorption between the LF and HF groups at day 28.
CONCLUSIONS: Heavy force with corticotomy increased tooth movement at days 7 and 14 but did not show any difference in alveolar bone change or root resorption.