Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Rate and anchorage loss during en-masse retraction between friction and frictionless mechanics: A randomized clinical trial.
Sardana, Rinkle; Chugh, Vinay Kumar; Bhatia, Navleen Kaur; Shastri, Dipti; Moungkhom, Priyawati; Kumar, Pravin; Chugh, Ankita; Singh, Surjit.
Afiliação
  • Sardana R; Section of Orthodontics, Department of Dentistry, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India.
  • Chugh VK; Section of Orthodontics, Department of Dentistry, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India.
  • Bhatia NK; Section of Orthodontics, Department of Dentistry, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India.
  • Shastri D; Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopaedics, King George's Medical University, Lucknow, Uttar Pradesh, India.
  • Moungkhom P; Section of Orthodontics, Department of Dentistry, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India.
  • Kumar P; Department of Dentistry, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India.
  • Chugh A; Section of Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery, Department of Dentistry, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India.
  • Singh S; Department of Pharmacology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Jodhpur, Rajasthan, India.
Orthod Craniofac Res ; 26(4): 598-607, 2023 Nov.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36919990
ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE:

To compare rate and anchorage loss during en-masse retraction of anterior maxillary teeth between friction mechanics (FM) and frictionless mechanics (FLM). SETTING AND SAMPLE POPULATION Thirty-eight patients requiring en-masse retraction of protruded anterior maxillary teeth were randomly allocated into FM and FLM groups.

METHODS:

En-masse retraction with sliding mechanics (FM) using an elastomeric chain was compared with continuous mushroom loop archwire mechanics (FLM). Study models and lateral cephalograms were taken before (T1) and immediately after retraction (T2). The primary outcome was the rate of en-masse retraction. Anchorage loss was the secondary outcome. Intergroup comparison was performed using an independent t test (P < .05).

RESULTS:

Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. Thirty-six patients completed the trial. Two patients were lost to follow-up in the FLM group. The rate of en-masse retraction did not differ significantly (P = .625) between FM (0.7 mm/mo) and FLM (0.8 mm/mo) groups. The intragroup comparison showed significant anchorage loss in FM (2.28 mm) and FLM (1.13 mm) groups; however, the intergroup comparison showed no statistically significant difference (P = .093). Maxillary first molar showed a statistically significant change in angulation between the two mechanic groups (P < .001). Vertical movement of the maxillary incisor and first molar showed no significant difference between FM and FLM groups (P = .143, P = .546, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS:

The rate of en-masse retraction and anchorage loss was comparable between the FM and FLM groups. Significant anchorage loss was seen with both mechanics. The result suggests that both the mechanic group require external reinforcement to prevent anchorage loss.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Procedimentos de Ancoragem Ortodôntica Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials / Prognostic_studies Limite: Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2023 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Coleções: 01-internacional Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Procedimentos de Ancoragem Ortodôntica Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials / Prognostic_studies Limite: Humans Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2023 Tipo de documento: Article