Comparison of the efficacy of two-time versus one-time micro-osteoperforation on maxillary canine retraction in orthodontic patients: A split-mouth randomized controlled clinical trial

Jaiswal, Abhijeet; Siddiqui, Hamza Parvez; Samrit, Vilas D; Duggal, Ritu; Kharbanda, Om Prakash; Rajeswari, Moganty R.

doi:10.1016/j.ortho.2021.06.003

Cited by 10 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Six completed RCTs [ 16 , 34 - 38 ], with a total of 152 patients, with ages ranging from 15 to 25 years, were included in this SR. One study included only female patients [ 36 ], three studies did not give information about sex distribution [ 16 , 34 , 35 ], while the other two studies included both genders, with a predominance of females [ 37 , 38 ]. Four of the involved studies were of a compound design (COMP) [a parallel-group design with a split-mouth design (SMD) in each group] [ 16 , 34 , 35 , 38 ], and the others were of SMD [ 36 , 37 ]. Three studies touched on the multiplicity of acceleration methods.…”

Section: Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Moreover, the third study combined multiple osteoperforation with a corticotomy procedure against multiple osteoperforation only [ 16 ]. On the other hand, the other three studies [ 35 , 37 , 38 ] discussed the efficacy of repeating the acceleration procedures. All three papers dealt with the repetition of MOPs at different time intervals.…”

Section: Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…All three papers dealt with the repetition of MOPs at different time intervals. The surgical interventions in the retrieved studies ranged from invasive (traditional corticotomy [ 16 , 36 ], multiple osteoperforation with flap elevation [ 16 ]) to minimally invasive (MOPs [ 34 , 35 , 37 , 38 ]).…”

Section: Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…All the included studies [ 16 , 34 - 38 ] involved extraction‑based treatments and were primarily about accelerating canine retraction. Four papers studied the upper canines retraction [ 16 , 34 , 36 , 37 ], one studied the distalization of both upper and lower canines [ 38 ], and one trial assessed the retraction of lower canines [ 35 ]. The retraction was performed on canines after the first premolar extraction, which was performed before the beginning of orthodontic treatment in two papers [ 34 , 37 ], and after the completion of leveling and alignment in two trials [ 16 , 36 ], while this information was not mentioned in the other studies [ 35 , 38 ].…”

Section: Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Measurement of tooth movement was expressed as RTM in five papers [ 34 - 38 ], and as TTM in one paper [ 16 ]. Four studies depended on temporary anchorage devices (TADs) [ 34 , 35 , 37 38 ], whereas the other studies used soldered trans-palatal arch for anchorage [ 16 , 36 ]. Concerning the method used to measure the speed of tooth movement, there were differences between the trials.…”

Section: Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

The Effectiveness of Repetition or Multiplicity of Different Surgical and Non-Surgical Procedures Compared to a Single Procedure Application in Accelerating Orthodontic Tooth Movement: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Alfailany¹,

Hajeer²,

Aljabban³

et al. 2022

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this study, we aimed to assess the current scientific evidence concerning the effectiveness of combining two acceleration techniques or repeating an acceleration procedure in comparison with the single application in terms of the speed of the orthodontic tooth movement (OTM). We performed a comprehensive electronic search to retrieve relevant studies on 10 databases. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on fixed orthodontic treatment patients who received multiple types of acceleration techniques or underwent a repeated acceleration procedure compared to a single application were included. Version 2 of the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials (RoB 2) was used for assessing the risk of bias of retrieved studies. A total of six RCTs were included in this review. Regarding multiple acceleration methods, it seems that the combination of low-level laser therapy (LLLT) with a surgical technique outperforms the single application of each technique separately. Additionally, the combination of two surgical interventions may have a synergistic effect leading to reduced treatment time compared to the application of a single intervention. Regarding acceleration method repetition, it seems that the re-application of surgical procedures twice is more efficient than the single application. The meta-analysis showed a non-significant difference in the canine retraction rate between the four-weekly micro-osteoperforations (MOPs) (three times of applications) and both the eight-weekly MOPs (two times of applications) [mean difference (MD) = 0.24; 95% CI: -0.2-0.77; p = 0.36], as well as 12-weekly MOPs (two times of applications) (MD = 0.06; 95% CI: -0.14-0.27; p = 0.55). Based on very low evidence, combining two acceleration techniques is superior over a single application in accelerating tooth movement. Again, very low evidence suggests that the efficacy of repetition of surgical procedures twice and three times is similar. Further high-quality RCTs are required to assess the benefit of repeating an acceleration procedure or combining two different methods. In addition, more insight is needed into the possible side effects associated with the repetition or multiplicity of procedures.

show abstract