Cargando…

Comparison of the Anchorage Value of the First Molars Supported with Implant and First Molars Supported with Second Molar during En Masse Retraction

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to determine the efficacy of mini-implants as adjuncts for intraoral anchorage units for en masse retraction of maxillary anterior teeth in bimaxillary dentoalveolar protrusion cases. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study sample consisted of 15 patients (10...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Naik, M. Kaladhar, Dharmadeep, Garadappagari, Muralidhar Reddy, Yellampalli, Cherukuri, Sreekanth, Praveen Raj, Kranthi, Reddy, Vishnuvardhan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7055340/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32181216
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jispcd.JISPCD_262_19
_version_ 1783503356851912704
author Naik, M. Kaladhar
Dharmadeep, Garadappagari
Muralidhar Reddy, Yellampalli
Cherukuri, Sreekanth
Praveen Raj, Kranthi
Reddy, Vishnuvardhan
author_facet Naik, M. Kaladhar
Dharmadeep, Garadappagari
Muralidhar Reddy, Yellampalli
Cherukuri, Sreekanth
Praveen Raj, Kranthi
Reddy, Vishnuvardhan
author_sort Naik, M. Kaladhar
collection PubMed
description AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to determine the efficacy of mini-implants as adjuncts for intraoral anchorage units for en masse retraction of maxillary anterior teeth in bimaxillary dentoalveolar protrusion cases. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study sample consisted of 15 patients (10 females and 5 males). The samples were compared for anchorage loss with the implant-supported molar and conventional molar contralaterally in both the maxilla and mandible after six months of retraction period. The mini-implants used were 1.5 mm in diameter and 8 mm in length and were inserted in the first and third quadrant between the roots of second premolar and first molar under local anesthesia at an angle of 45°. For en masse retraction, active tiebacks with ligating (100g) were used bilaterally extending from molar hooks to J-hook on a 0.019” × 0.025” stainless steel arch wire. Lateral cephalograms were taken before and after retraction for assessing the loss of anchorage in maxillary and mandibular first molars. RESULTS: Anchorage loss of 1.46 mm in the maxilla and 1.36 mm in mandible was found with conventional molar anchorage, whereas no statistically significant anchorage loss was found in the implant-supported molar side. CONCLUSION: Implant-supported molar side showed better anchorage compared with the conventional molar side. Hence, implant-supported molar can be used as an absolute anchorage unit in the en masse retraction of anterior teeth.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7055340
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Wolters Kluwer - Medknow
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-70553402020-03-16 Comparison of the Anchorage Value of the First Molars Supported with Implant and First Molars Supported with Second Molar during En Masse Retraction Naik, M. Kaladhar Dharmadeep, Garadappagari Muralidhar Reddy, Yellampalli Cherukuri, Sreekanth Praveen Raj, Kranthi Reddy, Vishnuvardhan J Int Soc Prev Community Dent Original Article AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to determine the efficacy of mini-implants as adjuncts for intraoral anchorage units for en masse retraction of maxillary anterior teeth in bimaxillary dentoalveolar protrusion cases. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study sample consisted of 15 patients (10 females and 5 males). The samples were compared for anchorage loss with the implant-supported molar and conventional molar contralaterally in both the maxilla and mandible after six months of retraction period. The mini-implants used were 1.5 mm in diameter and 8 mm in length and were inserted in the first and third quadrant between the roots of second premolar and first molar under local anesthesia at an angle of 45°. For en masse retraction, active tiebacks with ligating (100g) were used bilaterally extending from molar hooks to J-hook on a 0.019” × 0.025” stainless steel arch wire. Lateral cephalograms were taken before and after retraction for assessing the loss of anchorage in maxillary and mandibular first molars. RESULTS: Anchorage loss of 1.46 mm in the maxilla and 1.36 mm in mandible was found with conventional molar anchorage, whereas no statistically significant anchorage loss was found in the implant-supported molar side. CONCLUSION: Implant-supported molar side showed better anchorage compared with the conventional molar side. Hence, implant-supported molar can be used as an absolute anchorage unit in the en masse retraction of anterior teeth. Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2020-02-05 /pmc/articles/PMC7055340/ /pubmed/32181216 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jispcd.JISPCD_262_19 Text en Copyright: © 2020 Journal of International Society of Preventive and Community Dentistry 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
Naik, M. Kaladhar
Dharmadeep, Garadappagari
Muralidhar Reddy, Yellampalli
Cherukuri, Sreekanth
Praveen Raj, Kranthi
Reddy, Vishnuvardhan
Comparison of the Anchorage Value of the First Molars Supported with Implant and First Molars Supported with Second Molar during En Masse Retraction
title Comparison of the Anchorage Value of the First Molars Supported with Implant and First Molars Supported with Second Molar during En Masse Retraction
title_full Comparison of the Anchorage Value of the First Molars Supported with Implant and First Molars Supported with Second Molar during En Masse Retraction
title_fullStr Comparison of the Anchorage Value of the First Molars Supported with Implant and First Molars Supported with Second Molar during En Masse Retraction
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of the Anchorage Value of the First Molars Supported with Implant and First Molars Supported with Second Molar during En Masse Retraction
title_short Comparison of the Anchorage Value of the First Molars Supported with Implant and First Molars Supported with Second Molar during En Masse Retraction
title_sort comparison of the anchorage value of the first molars supported with implant and first molars supported with second molar during en masse retraction
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7055340/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32181216
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jispcd.JISPCD_262_19
work_keys_str_mv AT naikmkaladhar comparisonoftheanchoragevalueofthefirstmolarssupportedwithimplantandfirstmolarssupportedwithsecondmolarduringenmasseretraction
AT dharmadeepgaradappagari comparisonoftheanchoragevalueofthefirstmolarssupportedwithimplantandfirstmolarssupportedwithsecondmolarduringenmasseretraction
AT muralidharreddyyellampalli comparisonoftheanchoragevalueofthefirstmolarssupportedwithimplantandfirstmolarssupportedwithsecondmolarduringenmasseretraction
AT cherukurisreekanth comparisonoftheanchoragevalueofthefirstmolarssupportedwithimplantandfirstmolarssupportedwithsecondmolarduringenmasseretraction
AT praveenrajkranthi comparisonoftheanchoragevalueofthefirstmolarssupportedwithimplantandfirstmolarssupportedwithsecondmolarduringenmasseretraction
AT reddyvishnuvardhan comparisonoftheanchoragevalueofthefirstmolarssupportedwithimplantandfirstmolarssupportedwithsecondmolarduringenmasseretraction