Cargando…

Comparative evaluation of the maxillary canine retraction rate and anchorage loss between two types of self-ligating brackets using sliding mechanics

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the maxillary canine retraction rate and anchorage loss with active and passive self-ligating brackets (SLBs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was conducted on 10 patients whose age ranged from 14–20 years. The patients had minimal to no crowding with a dental protrusion of m...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Abu-Shahba, Ramadan, Alassiry, Ahmed
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6416991/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31001495
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jos.JOS_73_18
_version_ 1783403472878567424
author Abu-Shahba, Ramadan
Alassiry, Ahmed
author_facet Abu-Shahba, Ramadan
Alassiry, Ahmed
author_sort Abu-Shahba, Ramadan
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the maxillary canine retraction rate and anchorage loss with active and passive self-ligating brackets (SLBs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was conducted on 10 patients whose age ranged from 14–20 years. The patients had minimal to no crowding with a dental protrusion of maxillary incisor that required the extraction of maxillary first premolars and retraction of canines. The maxillary canines had to be in a good alignment and level before treatment to ensure that canine retraction had started from the same point bilaterally. A cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) had been taken for each patient's maxilla before treatment initiation and after complete canine retraction. Using nickel titanium, close-coil spring canine retraction on both sides and the rate of canine movement was measured. RESULTS: The patients were checked every 2 weeks to measure the retraction rate and ensure that a constant force (150 g) was being delivered to both canines. The pre- and post-canine retractions CBCT were superimposed to evaluate the pattern and rate of canine movement and anchorage loss. The result of this study showed no statistically significant difference between the two groups. CONCLUSION: The type of SLB, either active or passive, does not affect the rate or type of canine movement during its retraction in the orthodontic extraction cases, and the anchorage loss of the upper molars was nearly the same in both type.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6416991
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-64169912019-04-18 Comparative evaluation of the maxillary canine retraction rate and anchorage loss between two types of self-ligating brackets using sliding mechanics Abu-Shahba, Ramadan Alassiry, Ahmed J Orthod Sci Original Article OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the maxillary canine retraction rate and anchorage loss with active and passive self-ligating brackets (SLBs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was conducted on 10 patients whose age ranged from 14–20 years. The patients had minimal to no crowding with a dental protrusion of maxillary incisor that required the extraction of maxillary first premolars and retraction of canines. The maxillary canines had to be in a good alignment and level before treatment to ensure that canine retraction had started from the same point bilaterally. A cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) had been taken for each patient's maxilla before treatment initiation and after complete canine retraction. Using nickel titanium, close-coil spring canine retraction on both sides and the rate of canine movement was measured. RESULTS: The patients were checked every 2 weeks to measure the retraction rate and ensure that a constant force (150 g) was being delivered to both canines. The pre- and post-canine retractions CBCT were superimposed to evaluate the pattern and rate of canine movement and anchorage loss. The result of this study showed no statistically significant difference between the two groups. CONCLUSION: The type of SLB, either active or passive, does not affect the rate or type of canine movement during its retraction in the orthodontic extraction cases, and the anchorage loss of the upper molars was nearly the same in both type. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2019-02-20 /pmc/articles/PMC6416991/ /pubmed/31001495 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jos.JOS_73_18 Text en Copyright: © 2019 Journal of Orthodontic Science http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0 This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Original Article
Abu-Shahba, Ramadan
Alassiry, Ahmed
Comparative evaluation of the maxillary canine retraction rate and anchorage loss between two types of self-ligating brackets using sliding mechanics
title Comparative evaluation of the maxillary canine retraction rate and anchorage loss between two types of self-ligating brackets using sliding mechanics
title_full Comparative evaluation of the maxillary canine retraction rate and anchorage loss between two types of self-ligating brackets using sliding mechanics
title_fullStr Comparative evaluation of the maxillary canine retraction rate and anchorage loss between two types of self-ligating brackets using sliding mechanics
title_full_unstemmed Comparative evaluation of the maxillary canine retraction rate and anchorage loss between two types of self-ligating brackets using sliding mechanics
title_short Comparative evaluation of the maxillary canine retraction rate and anchorage loss between two types of self-ligating brackets using sliding mechanics
title_sort comparative evaluation of the maxillary canine retraction rate and anchorage loss between two types of self-ligating brackets using sliding mechanics
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6416991/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31001495
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jos.JOS_73_18
work_keys_str_mv AT abushahbaramadan comparativeevaluationofthemaxillarycanineretractionrateandanchoragelossbetweentwotypesofselfligatingbracketsusingslidingmechanics
AT alassiryahmed comparativeevaluationofthemaxillarycanineretractionrateandanchoragelossbetweentwotypesofselfligatingbracketsusingslidingmechanics