Miniscrew-supported distal jet versus conventional distal jet appliance: A pilot study.

BACKGROUND

Maxillary molar distalization is the most frequently used nonextraction treatment in the correction of Class II malocclusion. The use of traditional intra-oral devices shows unreliable results. Nowadays the use of miniscrew-supported appliances helps prevent anchorage loss. The aim of this pilot study is to compare the amount of upper first molar distalization and the dentoalveolar side effects using traditional distal jet appliance and miniscrew-supported distal jet appliance.

MATERIAL AND

METHODS

20 patients were randomly assigned to receive a treatment with miniscrew-supported distal jet appliance (Group A) or with traditional distal jet appliance (Group B). To ensure a safe and minimally invasive miniscrew insertion a surgical guide was used. Digital models and lateral cephalograms were obtained and analyzed before orthodontic treatment and at 6-month follow-up. Intergroup differences were determined using T- test. The significance was set at p ≤0.05. The intra-operator reliability was evaluated using a 2 sample T-test. The difference was not statistically significant (P ≤0.05 ), demonstrating an intra-operator reliability.

RESULTS

In Group A, a greater maxillary first molar distalization was recorded (P=0.002). Considering the dentoalveolar side effects, in Group A, a spontaneous distalization of the first premolars and a retroclination of central incisors were determined. In Group B, the first premolars tipped mesially with a proclination of the maxillary central incisors.

CONCLUSIONS

Miniscrew-supported distal jet appliance achieved a greater first molar distalization at 6-month follow-up and did not cause dento-alveolar side effects, such as the mesial drift of the premolars and the incisors. Key words:Molar distalization, distal jet appliance, skeletal anchorage, miniscrew, 3D printed surgical guide.