These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Mini-implant anchorage for en-masse retraction of maxillary anterior teeth: a clinical cephalometric study.
    Author: Upadhyay M, Yadav S, Patil S.
    Journal: Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop; 2008 Dec; 134(6):803-10. PubMed ID: 19061808.
    Abstract:
    INTRODUCTION: This study was conducted to determine the efficiency of mini-implants as intraoral anchorage units for en-masse retraction of the 6 maxillary anterior teeth when the first premolars are extracted compared with conventional methods of anchorage reinforcement. METHODS: Thirty patients requiring high anchorage after extraction of the maxillary first premolars were selected for this study. They were divided into 2 groups of 15 each. In the first group (G1), mini-implants were used for en-masse retraction; in the second group (G2), conventional methods of anchorage preservation were followed. Horizontal, vertical, and angular positions of the maxillary first molar and central incisor were evaluated cephalometrically before and after orthodontic retraction. RESULTS: The maxillary first molars in the G1 patients showed net distal movement of 0.55 mm, and mesial movement of 1.95 mm was found in G2. The differences were statistically significant. Distal tipping of the first molar of -0.13 degrees+/-3.63 degrees was seen in G1, and mesial tipping of 3.7 degrees+/-3.9 degrees was observed in G2. No significant differences were found in the rates of incisor retraction between the 2 groups. However, G1 showed more than 2 mm of incisor intrusion; this was statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Mini-implants are efficient for intraoral anchorage reinforcement for en-masse retraction and intrusion of maxillary anterior teeth. No anchorage loss was seen in either the horizontal or the vertical direction in G1 when compared with G2. However, a statistically significant decrease in intermolar width was noted in G1.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]