Cargando…

Evaluating the Amount of Tooth Movement and Root Resorption during Canine Retraction with Friction versus Frictionless Mechanics Using Cone Beam Computed Tomography

BACKGROUND: The current study was carried out to compare the amount of tooth movement during canine retraction comparing two different retraction mechanics; friction mechanics represented by a NiTi closed coil spring versus frictionless mechanics represented by T - loop, and their effect on root res...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Makhlouf, Mohamed, Aboul–Ezz, Amr, Fayed, Mona Salah, Hafez, Hend
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Republic of Macedonia 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5839454/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29531610
http://dx.doi.org/10.3889/oamjms.2018.066
_version_ 1783304416728711168
author Makhlouf, Mohamed
Aboul–Ezz, Amr
Fayed, Mona Salah
Hafez, Hend
author_facet Makhlouf, Mohamed
Aboul–Ezz, Amr
Fayed, Mona Salah
Hafez, Hend
author_sort Makhlouf, Mohamed
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The current study was carried out to compare the amount of tooth movement during canine retraction comparing two different retraction mechanics; friction mechanics represented by a NiTi closed coil spring versus frictionless mechanics represented by T - loop, and their effect on root resorption using Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT). METHOD: Ten patients were selected in a split-mouth study design that had a malocclusion that necessitates the extraction of maxillary first premolars and retraction of maxillary canines. The right maxillary canines were retracted using T - loops fabricated from 0.017 X 0.025 TMA wires. The left maxillary canines received NiTi coil spring with 150 gm of retraction force. Pre retraction and post retraction Cone Beam Computed Tomography were taken to evaluate the amount of tooth movement and root resorption using three-dimensional planes. RESULTS: T - loop side showed statistically significant higher mean anteroposterior measurement than NiTi coil spring side, indicating a lower amount of canine movement pre and post a canine retraction. Concerning the root resorption, there was no statistically significant change in the mean measurements of canine root length post retraction. CONCLUSION: The NiTi coil spring side showed more distal movement more than the T-loop side. Both retraction mechanics with controlled retraction force, do not cause root resorption.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5839454
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Republic of Macedonia
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-58394542018-03-12 Evaluating the Amount of Tooth Movement and Root Resorption during Canine Retraction with Friction versus Frictionless Mechanics Using Cone Beam Computed Tomography Makhlouf, Mohamed Aboul–Ezz, Amr Fayed, Mona Salah Hafez, Hend Open Access Maced J Med Sci Dental Science BACKGROUND: The current study was carried out to compare the amount of tooth movement during canine retraction comparing two different retraction mechanics; friction mechanics represented by a NiTi closed coil spring versus frictionless mechanics represented by T - loop, and their effect on root resorption using Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT). METHOD: Ten patients were selected in a split-mouth study design that had a malocclusion that necessitates the extraction of maxillary first premolars and retraction of maxillary canines. The right maxillary canines were retracted using T - loops fabricated from 0.017 X 0.025 TMA wires. The left maxillary canines received NiTi coil spring with 150 gm of retraction force. Pre retraction and post retraction Cone Beam Computed Tomography were taken to evaluate the amount of tooth movement and root resorption using three-dimensional planes. RESULTS: T - loop side showed statistically significant higher mean anteroposterior measurement than NiTi coil spring side, indicating a lower amount of canine movement pre and post a canine retraction. Concerning the root resorption, there was no statistically significant change in the mean measurements of canine root length post retraction. CONCLUSION: The NiTi coil spring side showed more distal movement more than the T-loop side. Both retraction mechanics with controlled retraction force, do not cause root resorption. Republic of Macedonia 2018-02-05 /pmc/articles/PMC5839454/ /pubmed/29531610 http://dx.doi.org/10.3889/oamjms.2018.066 Text en Copyright: © 2018 Mohamed Makhlouf, Amr Aboul-Ezz, Mona Salah Fayed, Hend Hafez. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/CC BY-NC/4.0 This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0).
spellingShingle Dental Science
Makhlouf, Mohamed
Aboul–Ezz, Amr
Fayed, Mona Salah
Hafez, Hend
Evaluating the Amount of Tooth Movement and Root Resorption during Canine Retraction with Friction versus Frictionless Mechanics Using Cone Beam Computed Tomography
title Evaluating the Amount of Tooth Movement and Root Resorption during Canine Retraction with Friction versus Frictionless Mechanics Using Cone Beam Computed Tomography
title_full Evaluating the Amount of Tooth Movement and Root Resorption during Canine Retraction with Friction versus Frictionless Mechanics Using Cone Beam Computed Tomography
title_fullStr Evaluating the Amount of Tooth Movement and Root Resorption during Canine Retraction with Friction versus Frictionless Mechanics Using Cone Beam Computed Tomography
title_full_unstemmed Evaluating the Amount of Tooth Movement and Root Resorption during Canine Retraction with Friction versus Frictionless Mechanics Using Cone Beam Computed Tomography
title_short Evaluating the Amount of Tooth Movement and Root Resorption during Canine Retraction with Friction versus Frictionless Mechanics Using Cone Beam Computed Tomography
title_sort evaluating the amount of tooth movement and root resorption during canine retraction with friction versus frictionless mechanics using cone beam computed tomography
topic Dental Science
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5839454/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29531610
http://dx.doi.org/10.3889/oamjms.2018.066
work_keys_str_mv AT makhloufmohamed evaluatingtheamountoftoothmovementandrootresorptionduringcanineretractionwithfrictionversusfrictionlessmechanicsusingconebeamcomputedtomography
AT aboulezzamr evaluatingtheamountoftoothmovementandrootresorptionduringcanineretractionwithfrictionversusfrictionlessmechanicsusingconebeamcomputedtomography
AT fayedmonasalah evaluatingtheamountoftoothmovementandrootresorptionduringcanineretractionwithfrictionversusfrictionlessmechanicsusingconebeamcomputedtomography
AT hafezhend evaluatingtheamountoftoothmovementandrootresorptionduringcanineretractionwithfrictionversusfrictionlessmechanicsusingconebeamcomputedtomography