International orthodontics · 2021
Efficacy of micro-osteoperforation of the alveolar bone by using mini-screw for acceleration of maxillary canine retraction in young adult orthodontic patients: A split-mouth randomized clinical trial.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание 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.
Golshah Amin, Moradi Parzhin, Nikkerdar Nafiseh
Аннотация
AIM: Acceleration of orthodontic tooth movement (OTM) can decrease the rate of complications. This study aimed to assess the efficacy of micro-osteoperforation (MOP) of the alveolar bone for acceleration of OTM by using mini-screws.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This split-mouth randomized clinical trial evaluated 25 patients (11 females, 14 males, 16-25 years) with class II division I malocclusion who required canine retraction following the extraction of maxillary first premolar. The patients received similar orthodontic treatment at both sides with MOP on one side (MOP group) and no MOP on the other side (control side). Allocation of MOP to the side of jaw was random using Random Allocation Software in 1:1 distribution and equal numbers. Blinding was not applicable. The rate of canine movement was measured monthly for 5 months and considered as the main outcome. The degree of canine tipping was measured at the end of the intervention as the secondary outcome. All measurements were repeated for 12 patients by the two observers and the intra- and inter-examiner correlation coefficients were found to be 0.946 and 0.925, respectively. Data were analysed by paired t-test and repeated measures ANOVA.
RESULTS: Twenty-five patients (11 females, 14 males, 16-25 years) were evaluated. No significant difference was found between the two groups at different time points in the rate of canine movement (P>0.05). The degree of canine tipping in the MOP group was significantly lower than that in the control group (5.34±3.11° versus 7.08±3.70°; P=0.040). Gender had no significant effect on OTM in any group (P>0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: MOP could not accelerate canine retraction but decreased the degree of canine tipping.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: This split-mouth randomized clinical trial evaluated 25 patients (11 females, 14 males, 16-25 years) with class II division I malocclusion who required canine retraction following the extraction of maxillary first premolar. The patients received similar orthodontic treatment at both sides with MOP on one side (MOP group) and no MOP on the other side (control side). Allocation of MOP to the side of jaw was random using Random Allocation Software in 1:1 distribution and equal numbers. Blinding was not applicable. The rate of canine movement was measured monthly for 5 months and considered as the main outcome. The degree of canine tipping was measured at the end of the intervention as the secondary outcome. All measurements were repeated for 12 patients by the two observers and the intra- and inter-examiner correlation coefficients were found to be 0.946 and 0.925, respectively. Data were analysed by paired t-test and repeated measures ANOVA.
RESULTS: Twenty-five patients (11 females, 14 males, 16-25 years) were evaluated. No significant difference was found between the two groups at different time points in the rate of canine movement (P>0.05). The degree of canine tipping in the MOP group was significantly lower than that in the control group (5.34±3.11° versus 7.08±3.70°; P=0.040). Gender had no significant effect on OTM in any group (P>0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: MOP could not accelerate canine retraction but decreased the degree of canine tipping.