Anchorage control using miniscrews in comparison to Essix appliance in treatment of postpubertal patients with Class II malocclusion using Carrière Motion Appliance:

Abstract

Objectives To evaluate anchorage control using miniscrews vs an Essix appliance in treatment of Class II malocclusion by distalization using the Carrière Motion Appliance (CMA). Materials and Methods Twenty-four postpubertal female patients with Class II, division 1 malocclusion were randomly distributed into two equal groups. CMA was bonded in both groups, and one group was treated with miniscrews as anchorage (12 patients, mean age = 18.0 years) while the other group was treated with an Essix appliance as anchorage (12 patients, mean age = 17.8 years). For each patient, two cone-beam computed tomographic scans were obtained: one preoperatively and another after completion of distalization. Results In the Essix appliance group, there was a statistically significant anterior movement (2.2 ± 1.43 mm) as well as proclination of the lower incisor (5.3° ± 4.0°), compared to a nonsignificant anterior movement (0.06 ± 1.45 mm) and proclination (0.86° ± 2.22°) in the miniscrew group. The amount of maxillary molar distalization was higher in the miniscrew group (2.57 ± 1.52 mm) than in the Essix appliance group (1.53 ± 1.11 mm); however, the difference was not statistically significant. Conclusions Miniscrews led to a decrease in the amount of anchorage loss in the mandibular incisors, both in terms of anterior movement and proclination.

Cephalometric and digital model analysis of Dentoskeletal effects of Infrazygomatic miniscrew vs. Essix- anchored Carriere Motion appliance for distalization of maxillary buccal segment: A randomized clinical trial

“…(2) Distal tipping of the upper molars was also reported in some other previous studies. (7,8,10,12,13) Additionally, distal tipping of the upper canine was detected in some previous studies (8,10,12) which is against the claims that the CMA's front section is a rigid half-round arm that controls the canine's inclination permitting bodily movement. (2) The signi cant intrusion of upper canine and rst molar in IZCG and the signi cant extrusion of them in EXG can be attributed to the vertical force component of the Class II elastics in EXG which is the opposite in IZCG.…”

“…These ndings in EXG were similar to previous studies. (14,16) However, other studies (7,9,10,12,13) found insigni cant sagittal changes during the treatment with CMA and attributed that to the more dentoalveolar effects of class II elastics. (20) Similar to other studies (7,9,12,13,16) , signi cant increase of LAFH and PFH was found in EXG.…”

Cephalometric and digital model analysis of dentoskeletal effects of infrazygomatic miniscrew vs. Essix- anchored Carriere Motion appliance for distalization of maxillary buccal segment: a randomized clinical trial

“…Other investigations [ 8 – 11 ] assessed the treatment by CMA anchored with Essix appliance and reported that the lower first molar moved and tipped mesially significantly with lower incisor proclination. Only one randomized clinical trial [ 12 ] (RCT) compared anchorage control using interdental miniscrews vs. Essix appliance and found that miniscrews reduced anchorage loss regarding the mandibular incisors.…”

A New Digital Method to Quantify the Effects Produced by Carriere Motion Appliance

“…Several of these studies concluded that changes are primarily dentoalveolar in nature [ 1 , 5 , 8 , 11 , 18 , 19 ]. However, these previous studies focused on analyzing the effects of the CMA (Henry Schein Inc., NY, USA) using traditional two-dimensional cephalometric recordings on radiographs [ 1 , 5 , 8 , 11 , 17 ] or with three-dimensional but highly invasive techniques, such as cone-beam computed tomography [ 16 , 20 , 21 ]. It is also worth noting that rotational changes can be observed using CBCT but not in conventional lateral cephalometric analysis [ 16 ], which is considered essential in the correction of dental class II malocclusions and is the main correction mechanism described by the author, who states that the CMA (Henry Schein Inc., NY, USA) produces “a distal rotational movement of the maxillary first molar around their palatal roots” [ 7 ].…”