Periodontal health of palatally displaced canines treated with open or closed surgical technique: A multicenter, randomized controlled trial

Periodontal status of buccally and palatally impacted maxillary canines after surgical-orthodontic treatment with open technique

“…Previous studies (15,17) have yielded conflicting findings regarding periodontal outcomes after surgical exposure and subsequent orthodontic alignment of submucosal impacted canines; some reported periodontal problems such as loss of alveolar bone height, increased pocket PDs, and loss of attached gingivae or found that treatment had a limited periodontal effect (17). In the present study, the periodontal outcome after orthodontic eruption was significantly worse in the BIMC group than in physiologically erupted contralateral canines.…”

“…A previous study (17) reported a significant difference of 0.2-0.6 mm in periodontal attachment between operated and unoperated PIMC, but the difference was considered clinically …”

“…Existing evidence (15)(16)(17) is unclear regarding periodontal outcomes after surgical exposure and subsequent orthodontic alignment of displaced canines-some studies reported periodontal problems, included loss of alveolar bone height, increased pocket probing depths, and loss of attached gingivae or found only a limited periodontal effect (17). The effects of open and closed technique on ultimate periodontal status has been extensively investigated (5,18 (19,20).…”

Esthetic judgments of palatally displaced canines 3 months postdebond after surgical exposure with either a closed or an open technique

“…2 A recent randomized controlled trial has confirmed this. 3 One outcome that has received limited investigation is the esthetic appearance of the PDC, following surgical exposure and alignment D A 4 obtained the esthetic judgments of orthodontists and patients concerning displaced canines that had been exposed using a closed surgical technique and orthodontically aligned. Their sample included the clinical photographs of 61 patients with either unilateral or bilateral, buccally or palatally displaced canines, a mean of 3.5 years after debond.…”

“…Another potential weakness was that the primary outcome of the overall study was based on periodontal, rather than the esthetic outcomes and evaluated using the traditional approach of testing the null hypothesis of no difference. 3 An analysis that tests for equivalence usually requires a larger sample size; therefore the study might not have sufficient power to determine equivalence.…”