A comparison of lower canine retraction and loss of anchorage between conventional and self-ligating brackets: a single-center randomized split-mouth controlled trial

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: da Costa Monini, André [UNESP]
Data de Publicação: 2017
Outros Autores: Júnior, Luiz Gonzaga Gandini [UNESP], Vianna, Alexandre Protásio [UNESP], Martins, Renato Parsekian [UNESP]
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Repositório Institucional da UNESP
Texto Completo: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00784-016-1855-7
http://hdl.handle.net/11449/178056
Resumo: Objective: To evaluate the rate of lower canine retraction, anchorage loss, and changes on lower canines and first molars axial inclination using self-ligating and conventional brackets. Materials and methods: Twenty-five adult patients with a treatment plan involving extractions of four first premolars were selected for this split-mouth trial and had either conventional or self-ligating brackets bonded to lower canines in a block randomization. Retraction was accomplished using 100-g nickel titanium closed-coil springs, which were reactivated each 4 weeks. Oblique radiographs were taken before and after total canine retraction and the cephalograms were superimposed on stable structures of the mandible. Cephalometric points were digitized twice by a single-blinded operator for error control and the average of the points were used to determine the following variables: canine cusp horizontal changes, molar cusp horizontal changes, and angulation changes in canines and molars. Paired t tests were used to analyze the blinded data for group differences. Results: All patients reached final phase without bracket debonds. No differences were found between the two groups for all variables tested. No serious harm was observed. Conclusion: Both brackets showed the same rate of canine retraction and loss of anteroposterior anchorage of the molars. No changes were found between brackets regarding the inclination of canines and first molars. Clinical Relevance: Using self-ligating brackets to retract lower canines will not increase the velocity of tooth movement, does not increase anchorage, and does not decrease tipping.
id UNSP_d2b917483cce348de3d569cfc27852d3
oai_identifier_str oai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/178056
network_acronym_str UNSP
network_name_str Repositório Institucional da UNESP
repository_id_str 2946
spelling A comparison of lower canine retraction and loss of anchorage between conventional and self-ligating brackets: a single-center randomized split-mouth controlled trialAnchorageCanine retractionSelf-ligating bracketsTooth movement rateObjective: To evaluate the rate of lower canine retraction, anchorage loss, and changes on lower canines and first molars axial inclination using self-ligating and conventional brackets. Materials and methods: Twenty-five adult patients with a treatment plan involving extractions of four first premolars were selected for this split-mouth trial and had either conventional or self-ligating brackets bonded to lower canines in a block randomization. Retraction was accomplished using 100-g nickel titanium closed-coil springs, which were reactivated each 4 weeks. Oblique radiographs were taken before and after total canine retraction and the cephalograms were superimposed on stable structures of the mandible. Cephalometric points were digitized twice by a single-blinded operator for error control and the average of the points were used to determine the following variables: canine cusp horizontal changes, molar cusp horizontal changes, and angulation changes in canines and molars. Paired t tests were used to analyze the blinded data for group differences. Results: All patients reached final phase without bracket debonds. No differences were found between the two groups for all variables tested. No serious harm was observed. Conclusion: Both brackets showed the same rate of canine retraction and loss of anteroposterior anchorage of the molars. No changes were found between brackets regarding the inclination of canines and first molars. Clinical Relevance: Using self-ligating brackets to retract lower canines will not increase the velocity of tooth movement, does not increase anchorage, and does not decrease tipping.Student of Faculdade de Odontologia de Araraquara Universidade Estadual Paulista UNESPFaculdade de Odontologia de Araraquara Universidade Estadual Paulista UNESPBaylor College of DentistryUSA and Saint Louis UniversityStudent of Faculdade de Odontologia de Araraquara Universidade Estadual Paulista UNESPFaculdade de Odontologia de Araraquara Universidade Estadual Paulista UNESPUniversidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)Baylor College of DentistryUSA and Saint Louis Universityda Costa Monini, André [UNESP]Júnior, Luiz Gonzaga Gandini [UNESP]Vianna, Alexandre Protásio [UNESP]Martins, Renato Parsekian [UNESP]2018-12-11T17:28:23Z2018-12-11T17:28:23Z2017-05-01info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/article1047-1053application/pdfhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00784-016-1855-7Clinical Oral Investigations, v. 21, n. 4, p. 1047-1053, 2017.1436-37711432-6981http://hdl.handle.net/11449/17805610.1007/s00784-016-1855-72-s2.0-849730990782-s2.0-84973099078.pdfScopusreponame:Repositório Institucional da UNESPinstname:Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)instacron:UNESPengClinical Oral Investigations0,9860,986info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2023-12-16T06:25:14Zoai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/178056Repositório InstitucionalPUBhttp://repositorio.unesp.br/oai/requestopendoar:29462024-08-05T20:31:28.878198Repositório Institucional da UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv A comparison of lower canine retraction and loss of anchorage between conventional and self-ligating brackets: a single-center randomized split-mouth controlled trial
title A comparison of lower canine retraction and loss of anchorage between conventional and self-ligating brackets: a single-center randomized split-mouth controlled trial
spellingShingle A comparison of lower canine retraction and loss of anchorage between conventional and self-ligating brackets: a single-center randomized split-mouth controlled trial
da Costa Monini, André [UNESP]
Anchorage
Canine retraction
Self-ligating brackets
Tooth movement rate
title_short A comparison of lower canine retraction and loss of anchorage between conventional and self-ligating brackets: a single-center randomized split-mouth controlled trial
title_full A comparison of lower canine retraction and loss of anchorage between conventional and self-ligating brackets: a single-center randomized split-mouth controlled trial
title_fullStr A comparison of lower canine retraction and loss of anchorage between conventional and self-ligating brackets: a single-center randomized split-mouth controlled trial
title_full_unstemmed A comparison of lower canine retraction and loss of anchorage between conventional and self-ligating brackets: a single-center randomized split-mouth controlled trial
title_sort A comparison of lower canine retraction and loss of anchorage between conventional and self-ligating brackets: a single-center randomized split-mouth controlled trial
author da Costa Monini, André [UNESP]
author_facet da Costa Monini, André [UNESP]
Júnior, Luiz Gonzaga Gandini [UNESP]
Vianna, Alexandre Protásio [UNESP]
Martins, Renato Parsekian [UNESP]
author_role author
author2 Júnior, Luiz Gonzaga Gandini [UNESP]
Vianna, Alexandre Protásio [UNESP]
Martins, Renato Parsekian [UNESP]
author2_role author
author
author
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)
Baylor College of Dentistry
USA and Saint Louis University
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv da Costa Monini, André [UNESP]
Júnior, Luiz Gonzaga Gandini [UNESP]
Vianna, Alexandre Protásio [UNESP]
Martins, Renato Parsekian [UNESP]
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Anchorage
Canine retraction
Self-ligating brackets
Tooth movement rate
topic Anchorage
Canine retraction
Self-ligating brackets
Tooth movement rate
description Objective: To evaluate the rate of lower canine retraction, anchorage loss, and changes on lower canines and first molars axial inclination using self-ligating and conventional brackets. Materials and methods: Twenty-five adult patients with a treatment plan involving extractions of four first premolars were selected for this split-mouth trial and had either conventional or self-ligating brackets bonded to lower canines in a block randomization. Retraction was accomplished using 100-g nickel titanium closed-coil springs, which were reactivated each 4 weeks. Oblique radiographs were taken before and after total canine retraction and the cephalograms were superimposed on stable structures of the mandible. Cephalometric points were digitized twice by a single-blinded operator for error control and the average of the points were used to determine the following variables: canine cusp horizontal changes, molar cusp horizontal changes, and angulation changes in canines and molars. Paired t tests were used to analyze the blinded data for group differences. Results: All patients reached final phase without bracket debonds. No differences were found between the two groups for all variables tested. No serious harm was observed. Conclusion: Both brackets showed the same rate of canine retraction and loss of anteroposterior anchorage of the molars. No changes were found between brackets regarding the inclination of canines and first molars. Clinical Relevance: Using self-ligating brackets to retract lower canines will not increase the velocity of tooth movement, does not increase anchorage, and does not decrease tipping.
publishDate 2017
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2017-05-01
2018-12-11T17:28:23Z
2018-12-11T17:28:23Z
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00784-016-1855-7
Clinical Oral Investigations, v. 21, n. 4, p. 1047-1053, 2017.
1436-3771
1432-6981
http://hdl.handle.net/11449/178056
10.1007/s00784-016-1855-7
2-s2.0-84973099078
2-s2.0-84973099078.pdf
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00784-016-1855-7
http://hdl.handle.net/11449/178056
identifier_str_mv Clinical Oral Investigations, v. 21, n. 4, p. 1047-1053, 2017.
1436-3771
1432-6981
10.1007/s00784-016-1855-7
2-s2.0-84973099078
2-s2.0-84973099078.pdf
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv Clinical Oral Investigations
0,986
0,986
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv 1047-1053
application/pdf
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Scopus
reponame:Repositório Institucional da UNESP
instname:Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)
instacron:UNESP
instname_str Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)
instacron_str UNESP
institution UNESP
reponame_str Repositório Institucional da UNESP
collection Repositório Institucional da UNESP
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositório Institucional da UNESP - Universidade Estadual Paulista (UNESP)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1808129214584455168