Rate of intrusion of maxillary incisors in Class II Div 1 malocclusion using skeletal anchorage device and Connecticut intrusion arch

Kumar, Prasanna; Datana, Sanjeev; Londhe, SM; Kadu, Abhijeet

doi:10.1016/j.mjafi.2015.10.006

Cited by 15 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 17 publications

(14 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Seven parallel-group RCTs were included in this review. [17][18][19][20][21][22][23] All included RCTs were conducted in university settings, with the exception of one study. 22 Studies included a total of 202 treated patients with an age range mostly falling between 15 and 22 years.…”

Section: Study Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[17][18][19][20][21][22][23] All included RCTs were conducted in university settings, with the exception of one study. 22 Studies included a total of 202 treated patients with an age range mostly falling between 15 and 22 years. A total of 99 participants were allocated to the miniscrew group, and 95 participants were analyzed after being allocated to the intrusion arch group.…”

Section: Study Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effectiveness of miniscrew-supported maxillary incisor intrusion in deep-bite correction: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Sosly

Mohammed

Rizk

et al. 2019

The Angle Orthodontist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: To evaluate systematically the effectiveness of miniscrew-supported maxillary incisor intrusion compared with other nonsurgical intrusive mechanics for deep-bite correction. Materials and Methods: Unrestricted electronic searches in Embase, Web of Science, MEDLINE, LILACS, and Cochrane's CENTRAL as well as manual searches were conducted up to August 2019. Only randomized clinical trials (RCTs) were included. Study selection, data extraction, and bias assessment were done by two independent reviewers. The Cochrane risk-of-bias tool was used, and the quality of evidence was graded using the GRADE approach. A random-effects meta-analysis of continuous data, with its 95% confidence intervals (CIs), was used. Results: Seven RCTs were included in the quantitative synthesis, and the overall quality of evidence was very low to low. When compared with intrusion arches, miniscrews resulted in a more efficient deep-bite reduction with a standardized mean difference (SMD) of −0.48 (95% CI, −0.89 to −0.07). When miniscrews were used, a statistically significant difference was observed favoring less maxillary molar extrusion (SMD, −0.86; 95% CI, −1.46 to −0.27) and more incisor intrusion as measured from centroid to palatal plane (SMD, −0.95; 95% CI, −1.41 to −0.49). Results also showed a statistically nonsignificant difference regarding the amount of resultant root resorption between miniscrews and intrusion arches. Conclusions: There is weak evidence indicating efficient deep-bite correction using miniscrews. Root resorption seems to be an associated adverse effect that occurs regardless of the intrusive mechanics used. These conclusions should be viewed with great caution as further well-designed long-term research is recommended.

show abstract

Section: Study Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Study Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effectiveness of miniscrew-supported maxillary incisor intrusion in deep-bite correction: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Sosly

Mohammed

Rizk

et al. 2019

The Angle Orthodontist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Twelve studies were then excluded because of the age of the participants (Table 3). 2,[5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15] The excluded studies assessed growth based on either the hand-wrist or the cervical vertebral maturation (CVM) radiograph for determining the end of the growth phase. However, the vertical growth pattern is well known to continue after the adolescent growth spurt and well into mid-adulthood in both males and females, and those studies did not factor out this component.…”

Section: Literature Searchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Thank Orthodontic Intrusion Using Temporary Anchorage Devices Compared to Other Orthodontic Intrusion Methods: A Systematic Review

Al-Maghlouth¹,

AlMubarak²,

Almaghlouth³

et al. 2021

CCIDE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Most of the studies quantifying upper incisor intrusion have used lateral cephalograms to perform measurements [7,9,12,17,18], while a few have evaluated root resorption using CBCT sagittal sections [14,19].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Most of them use posterior teeth for anchorage, although this may produce unwanted reciprocal effects. An intrusion archwire is often used for overbite correction [ 14 – 17 ]. Comparing intrusion archwires with miniscrews, some authors have reported significantly more incisor proclination when using intrusion archwires [ 15 ], while others have found significantly more intrusion and generally better results using miniscrews [ 17 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

One versus two anterior miniscrews for correcting upper incisor overbite and angulation: a retrospective comparative study

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Miniscrews are effective devices for performing upper incisor intrusion. Different mechanics can be applied depending on the treatment objectives. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of one or two anterior miniscrews for upper incisor correction in cases of overbite and angulation in adult patients. Methods: Forty-four adults with deep overbite were divided into two groups: group 1 was treated with one miniscrew between upper central incisors and group 2 with two miniscrews between upper lateral incisors and canines. Incisor intrusion and length were measured from lateral cephalograms before treatment, after treatment and at least 12 months into retention (T0, T1 and T2). Forces were applied (90 g) from the miniscrews to the archwire using elastomeric chains. ANOVA analysis was used to determine whether differences between evaluation times were statistically significant. Results: Mean root resorption was 2.15 ± 0.85 mm, which ceased after active treatment. Overbite mean correction was − 3.23 ± 1.73 mm with no statistically significant relapse. Overbite correction and incisor intrusion were significantly greater in group 2 (− 3.80 ± 1.43 versus − 2.75 ± 1.63 for OB and 8.19 ± 3.66 versus 5.69 ± 2.66 for intrusion). Resorption and overbite correction were positively related. No counterclockwise rotation of the mandibular plane was observed. Conclusions: Overbite correction can be performed by means of upper incisor intrusion without rotation of the mandibular plane. Correction of upper incisor intrusion and overbite is greater in patients treated with two miniscrews. The increase in upper incisor buccal angulation is greater with one miniscrew. Root resorption is positively related to the extent of intrusion. Stability is satisfactory regardless of whether one or two miniscrews are used.

show abstract

Rate of intrusion of maxillary incisors in Class II Div 1 malocclusion using skeletal anchorage device and Connecticut intrusion arch

Cited by 15 publications

References 17 publications

Effectiveness of miniscrew-supported maxillary incisor intrusion in deep-bite correction: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Effectiveness of miniscrew-supported maxillary incisor intrusion in deep-bite correction: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Thank Orthodontic Intrusion Using Temporary Anchorage Devices Compared to Other Orthodontic Intrusion Methods: A Systematic Review

One versus two anterior miniscrews for correcting upper incisor overbite and angulation: a retrospective comparative study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About