A comparison of lower canine retraction and loss of anchorage between conventional and self-ligating brackets: a single-center randomized split-mouth controlled trial
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2017 |
Outros Autores: | , , |
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/openAccess2024-09-26T14:21:55Zoai:repositorio.unesp.br:11449/178056Repositório InstitucionalPUBhttp://repositorio.unesp.br/oai/requestrepositoriounesp@unesp.bropendoar:29462024-09-26T14:21:55Repositório 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 |
repositoriounesp@unesp.br |
_version_ |
1813546478730215424 |