Comparison of second molar protraction using different timing for piezocision application: A randomized clinical trial

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: ALHAIJA,Elham S. ABU
Data de Publicação: 2022
Outros Autores: AL-AREQI,Marwan M., MAAITAH,Emad F. AL
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics
Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2176-94512022000400307
Resumo: ABSTRACT Objective: To compare second molar protraction between early, late and no piezocision groups. Material and Methods: Forty subjects with bilaterally extracted mandibular first molars were selected to participate in the study. Subjects were subdivided into two groups: piezocision and no piezocision. The piezocision group was further subdivided into two subgroups: early piezocision (piezocision performed immediately before second molar protraction) and late piezocision (piezocision performed three months after starting molar protraction). In the no piezocision group, molar protraction was done without surgery. The intervention (piezocision group and timing of piezocision/side within group) was randomly allocated using the permuted random block size of 2, with 1:1 allocation ratio. The amount of second molar protraction, duration of space closure and anterior anchorage loss were measured. A repeated measures analysis of variance was conducted to define the differences between the measured variables at the different time intervals. Differences between groups were assessed using ANOVA test. Results: No difference was detected between early and late piezocision groups in the amount of molar protraction at the end of space closure. Duration of complete space closure was 9 and 10 months in the piezocision and no piezocision groups. Anchorage loss was similar between the three studied groups. Conclusions: Early and late piezocision have similar effect and both increased the amount of second molar protraction temporarily in the first 2-3 months after surgery. Duration of mandibular first molar space closure was reduced by one month when piezocision was applied. Anchorage loss was similar in the three groups.
id DPI-1_ed6d61a2c4479ca829788608a7f2a8d8
oai_identifier_str oai:scielo:S2176-94512022000400307
network_acronym_str DPI-1
network_name_str Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics
repository_id_str
spelling Comparison of second molar protraction using different timing for piezocision application: A randomized clinical trialPiezocisionMolar protractionTimingABSTRACT Objective: To compare second molar protraction between early, late and no piezocision groups. Material and Methods: Forty subjects with bilaterally extracted mandibular first molars were selected to participate in the study. Subjects were subdivided into two groups: piezocision and no piezocision. The piezocision group was further subdivided into two subgroups: early piezocision (piezocision performed immediately before second molar protraction) and late piezocision (piezocision performed three months after starting molar protraction). In the no piezocision group, molar protraction was done without surgery. The intervention (piezocision group and timing of piezocision/side within group) was randomly allocated using the permuted random block size of 2, with 1:1 allocation ratio. The amount of second molar protraction, duration of space closure and anterior anchorage loss were measured. A repeated measures analysis of variance was conducted to define the differences between the measured variables at the different time intervals. Differences between groups were assessed using ANOVA test. Results: No difference was detected between early and late piezocision groups in the amount of molar protraction at the end of space closure. Duration of complete space closure was 9 and 10 months in the piezocision and no piezocision groups. Anchorage loss was similar between the three studied groups. Conclusions: Early and late piezocision have similar effect and both increased the amount of second molar protraction temporarily in the first 2-3 months after surgery. Duration of mandibular first molar space closure was reduced by one month when piezocision was applied. Anchorage loss was similar in the three groups.Dental Press International2022-01-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2176-94512022000400307Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics v.27 n.4 2022reponame:Dental Press Journal of Orthodonticsinstname:Dental Press International (DPI)instacron:DPI10.1590/2177-6709.27.4.e2220503.oarinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessALHAIJA,Elham S. ABUAL-AREQI,Marwan M.MAAITAH,Emad F. ALeng2022-09-20T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S2176-94512022000400307Revistahttp://www.scielo.br/dpjoONGhttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.phpartigos@dentalpress.com.br||davidnormando@hotmail.com2177-67092176-9451opendoar:2022-09-20T00:00Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics - Dental Press International (DPI)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Comparison of second molar protraction using different timing for piezocision application: A randomized clinical trial
title Comparison of second molar protraction using different timing for piezocision application: A randomized clinical trial
spellingShingle Comparison of second molar protraction using different timing for piezocision application: A randomized clinical trial
ALHAIJA,Elham S. ABU
Piezocision
Molar protraction
Timing
title_short Comparison of second molar protraction using different timing for piezocision application: A randomized clinical trial
title_full Comparison of second molar protraction using different timing for piezocision application: A randomized clinical trial
title_fullStr Comparison of second molar protraction using different timing for piezocision application: A randomized clinical trial
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of second molar protraction using different timing for piezocision application: A randomized clinical trial
title_sort Comparison of second molar protraction using different timing for piezocision application: A randomized clinical trial
author ALHAIJA,Elham S. ABU
author_facet ALHAIJA,Elham S. ABU
AL-AREQI,Marwan M.
MAAITAH,Emad F. AL
author_role author
author2 AL-AREQI,Marwan M.
MAAITAH,Emad F. AL
author2_role author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv ALHAIJA,Elham S. ABU
AL-AREQI,Marwan M.
MAAITAH,Emad F. AL
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Piezocision
Molar protraction
Timing
topic Piezocision
Molar protraction
Timing
description ABSTRACT Objective: To compare second molar protraction between early, late and no piezocision groups. Material and Methods: Forty subjects with bilaterally extracted mandibular first molars were selected to participate in the study. Subjects were subdivided into two groups: piezocision and no piezocision. The piezocision group was further subdivided into two subgroups: early piezocision (piezocision performed immediately before second molar protraction) and late piezocision (piezocision performed three months after starting molar protraction). In the no piezocision group, molar protraction was done without surgery. The intervention (piezocision group and timing of piezocision/side within group) was randomly allocated using the permuted random block size of 2, with 1:1 allocation ratio. The amount of second molar protraction, duration of space closure and anterior anchorage loss were measured. A repeated measures analysis of variance was conducted to define the differences between the measured variables at the different time intervals. Differences between groups were assessed using ANOVA test. Results: No difference was detected between early and late piezocision groups in the amount of molar protraction at the end of space closure. Duration of complete space closure was 9 and 10 months in the piezocision and no piezocision groups. Anchorage loss was similar between the three studied groups. Conclusions: Early and late piezocision have similar effect and both increased the amount of second molar protraction temporarily in the first 2-3 months after surgery. Duration of mandibular first molar space closure was reduced by one month when piezocision was applied. Anchorage loss was similar in the three groups.
publishDate 2022
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2022-01-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2176-94512022000400307
url http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2176-94512022000400307
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 10.1590/2177-6709.27.4.e2220503.oar
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv text/html
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Dental Press International
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Dental Press International
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics v.27 n.4 2022
reponame:Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics
instname:Dental Press International (DPI)
instacron:DPI
instname_str Dental Press International (DPI)
instacron_str DPI
institution DPI
reponame_str Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics
collection Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics
repository.name.fl_str_mv Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics - Dental Press International (DPI)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv artigos@dentalpress.com.br||davidnormando@hotmail.com
_version_ 1754122399157059584