En-masse retraction of maxillary anterior teeth with the Double J retractor and palatal miniscrews: A case report

Liaw, Johnny Joung-Lin; Tai, Sandra; Huang, Greg J.

doi:10.1016/j.ajodo.2020.11.043

Cited by 4 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The torquing spring was placed approximately 8 mm from the gingival line along the palatal mini-implant between the second premolar and first molar. Additionally, Liaw et al reported a case using this design [23,31]. Park et al [14] and Joo [22] reported designs made with elastics (Figure 5).…”

Section: ) Accessory Partsmentioning

confidence: 93%

“…The main difference between the two retractors is that DJR has additional torquing springs in the retraction lever arms. A torquing spring with a helix helps control the torque when retracting the anterior teeth [23].…”

Section: History Of Various Lingual Retractors With a Tsadsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Therefore, they stated that during anterior retraction using DJR, the optimal position of the mini-implants should be 8 mm from the cervical level of the first molar [7]. Torquing springs are activated either directly by mini-implants or by applying intermaxillary elastics to counteract the lingual tipping movement of the anterior teeth during retraction (Figure 9) [23].…”

Section: Biomechanics Of the Djr With Tsadsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Figure 9a shows that the direction of the force passing above and below the CR of the anterior teeth is equal to the direction of force passing through the CR. Class II intermaxillary elastics generates the forward rotation moment of the anterior teeth [23,31]. Figure 9b shows the direction of force that passes through the CR of the anterior teeth, allowing bodily movement of the anterior teeth.…”

Section: Biomechanics Of the Djr With Tsadsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…During retraction, a downward force can be generated by contacting the mini-implants with a torquing spring. Therefore, it creates the forward rotation moment in the anterior teeth [23,31].…”

Section: Biomechanics Of the Djr With Tsadsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Clinical Application and Biomechanics of Various Lingual Retractors with Temporary Skeletal Anchorage Devices: A Narrative Review

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The lingual retractor is an appliance with esthetic advantages and biomechanical superiority in the retraction of anterior teeth, when used in combination with temporary skeletal anchorage devices (TSADs). These appliances can address the patients’ chief complaint during the early stages of bialveolar protrusion treatment. This narrative review presents the clinical applications and biomechanics of various lingual retractors with TSADs.This review includes all research and case reports related to various lingual retractors such as the C-lingual retractor (CLR), double J retractor (DJR), and antero-posterior lingual retractor (APLR). Anterior torque and vertical control can be achieved with all three types of lingual retractors by changing the length of the lever arms and the position of the TSADs. Torquing springs in DJR are designed to slide along palatal mini-implants or to apply intermaxillary elastics to counteract retroclination of the incisors during space closure. APLR allows three-dimensional control of the anterior tooth movement with anterior lever arms, guide bars, posterior tubes, and position of TSADs. Various lingual retractors with TSADs are effectively proper anterior torque and vertical control.

show abstract

Section: ) Accessory Partsmentioning

confidence: 93%

Section: History Of Various Lingual Retractors With a Tsadsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Biomechanics Of the Djr With Tsadsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Biomechanics Of the Djr With Tsadsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Biomechanics Of the Djr With Tsadsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Clinical Application and Biomechanics of Various Lingual Retractors with Temporary Skeletal Anchorage Devices: A Narrative Review

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Creative biomechanics for complex cases

Liaw,

Park,

Shih

et al. 2024

Seminars in Orthodontics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Comparative assessment of orthodontic clear aligner versus fixed appliance for anterior retraction: a finite element study

Xia,

Wang,

Wang

et al. 2024

BMC Oral Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The aim of this study is to conduct a comparative evaluation of different designs of clear aligners and examine the disparities between clear aligners and fixed appliances. Methods 3D digital models were created, consisting of a maxillary dentition without first premolars, maxilla, periodontal ligaments, attachments, micro-implant, 3D printed lingual retractor, brackets, archwire and clear aligner. The study involved the creation of five design models for clear aligner maxillary anterior internal retraction and one design model for fixed appliance maxillary anterior internal retraction, which were subsequently subjected to finite element analysis. These design models included: (1) Model C0 Control, (2) Model C1 Posterior Micro-implant, (3) Model C2 Anterior Micro-implant, (4) Model C3 Palatal Plate, (5) Model C4 Lingual Retractor, and (6) Model F0 Fixed Appliance. Results In the clear aligner models, a consistent pattern of tooth movement was observed. Notably, among all tested models, the modified clear aligner Model C3 exhibited the smallest differences in sagittal displacement of the crown-root of the central incisor, vertical displacement of the central incisor, sagittal displacement of the second premolar and second molar, as well as vertical displacement of posterior teeth. However, distinct variations in tooth movement trends were observed between the clear aligner models and the fixed appliance model. Furthermore, compared to the fixed appliance model, significant increases in tooth displacement were achieved with the use of clear aligner models. Conclusions In the clear aligner models, the movement trend of the teeth remained consistent, but there were variations in the amount of tooth displacement. Overall, the Model C3 exhibited better torque control and provided greater protection for posterior anchorage teeth compared to the other four clear aligner models. On the other hand, the fixed appliance model provides superior anterior torque control and better protection of the posterior anchorage teeth compared to clear aligner models. The clear aligner approach and the fixed appliance approach still exhibit a disparity; nevertheless, this study offers a developmental direction and establishes a theoretical foundation for future non-invasive, aesthetically pleasing, comfortable, and efficient modalities of clear aligner treatment.

show abstract

En-masse retraction of maxillary anterior teeth with the Double J retractor and palatal miniscrews: A case report

Cited by 4 publications

References 13 publications

Clinical Application and Biomechanics of Various Lingual Retractors with Temporary Skeletal Anchorage Devices: A Narrative Review

Clinical Application and Biomechanics of Various Lingual Retractors with Temporary Skeletal Anchorage Devices: A Narrative Review

Creative biomechanics for complex cases

Comparative assessment of orthodontic clear aligner versus fixed appliance for anterior retraction: a finite element study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About