Search engine for discovering works of Art, research articles, and books related to Art and Culture
ShareThis
Javascript must be enabled to continue!

Comparison between direct vs indirect anchorage in two miniscrew-supported distalizing devices

View through CrossRef
ABSTRACT Objective:  To compare two distalizing devices supported by palatal miniscrews, the MGBM System (MGBM) and the Distal Screw appliance (DS), in dental Class II patients. Materials and Methods:  Pretreatment (T1) and postdistalization (T2) lateral cephalograms of 53 Class II malocclusion subjects were examined. MGBM consisted of 29 patients (16 males, 13 females) with a mean pretreatment age of 12.3 ± 1.5 years; DS consisted of 24 patients (11 males, 13 females) with a mean pretreatment age of 11.3 ± 1.2 years. The mean distalization time was 6 ± 2 months for MGBM and 9 ± 2 months for DS. Initial and final measurements and treatment changes were compared by means of a Student’s t-test. Results:  Maxillary superimpositions showed that the maxillary first molar distalized an average of 5.5 mm in the MGBM and 3.2 mm in the DS between T1 and T2; distal molar tipping was greater in the MGBM (10.3°) than in the DS (3.0°). First premolar showed a mean mesial movement of 1.4 mm, with a mesial tipping of 4.4° in the MGBM; on the contrary, first premolar showed a distal movement of 2.2 mm, with a distal tipping of 6.2°, in the DS. Conclusions:  The MGBM system resulted in greater distal molar movement and less treatment time, resulting in more efficient movement than was associated with the DS; DS showed less molar tipping during distalization.
Title: Comparison between direct vs indirect anchorage in two miniscrew-supported distalizing devices
Description:
ABSTRACT Objective:  To compare two distalizing devices supported by palatal miniscrews, the MGBM System (MGBM) and the Distal Screw appliance (DS), in dental Class II patients.
Materials and Methods:  Pretreatment (T1) and postdistalization (T2) lateral cephalograms of 53 Class II malocclusion subjects were examined.
MGBM consisted of 29 patients (16 males, 13 females) with a mean pretreatment age of 12.
3 ± 1.
5 years; DS consisted of 24 patients (11 males, 13 females) with a mean pretreatment age of 11.
3 ± 1.
2 years.
The mean distalization time was 6 ± 2 months for MGBM and 9 ± 2 months for DS.
Initial and final measurements and treatment changes were compared by means of a Student’s t-test.
Results:  Maxillary superimpositions showed that the maxillary first molar distalized an average of 5.
5 mm in the MGBM and 3.
2 mm in the DS between T1 and T2; distal molar tipping was greater in the MGBM (10.
3°) than in the DS (3.
0°).
First premolar showed a mean mesial movement of 1.
4 mm, with a mesial tipping of 4.
4° in the MGBM; on the contrary, first premolar showed a distal movement of 2.
2 mm, with a distal tipping of 6.
2°, in the DS.
Conclusions:  The MGBM system resulted in greater distal molar movement and less treatment time, resulting in more efficient movement than was associated with the DS; DS showed less molar tipping during distalization.

Related Results

Anchorage loss and inclination during retraction: A systematic review
Anchorage loss and inclination during retraction: A systematic review
This review focused on anchorage lost and incisor inclination variation in the orthodontic retraction process. It compared the effectiveness of skeletal anchorage to that of conven...
Orthodontic Implants
Orthodontic Implants
Anchorage control in orthodontic treatments is one of the fundamental factors directly affecting treatment efficacy. Traditional anchorage methods, which mostly rely on dental stru...
Clinical Experience and Digital Knowledge in Virtual Planning of Palatal Orthodontic Miniscrew Insertion
Clinical Experience and Digital Knowledge in Virtual Planning of Palatal Orthodontic Miniscrew Insertion
At present, temporary anchorage devices (TADs) are continuously gaining importance because of their usability and their possibility to broaden clinical force applications; however,...
Microscrew Anchorage in Skeletal Anterior Open-bite Treatment
Microscrew Anchorage in Skeletal Anterior Open-bite Treatment
Abstract Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of miniscrew anchorage for intrusion of the posterior dentoalveolar region to correct skeletal open bite. ...
Oral Health Related Quality of Life Assessment in Orthodontic Patients with Anchorage Reinforcement
Oral Health Related Quality of Life Assessment in Orthodontic Patients with Anchorage Reinforcement
Objectives: To assess oral health related quality of life (OHRQoL) among orthodontic patients who had been allocated into three methods of orthodontic anchorage; transpalatal arch ...
Optimal Localization of Smart Aggregate Sensor for Concrete Damage Monitoring in PSC Anchorage Zone
Optimal Localization of Smart Aggregate Sensor for Concrete Damage Monitoring in PSC Anchorage Zone
This study investigates the feasibility of smart aggregate (SA) sensors and their optimal locations for impedance-based damage monitoring in prestressed concrete (PSC) anchorage zo...
Temporary anchorage devices in orthodontics: A review
Temporary anchorage devices in orthodontics: A review
During orthodontic treatment it is crucial to prevent the unintentional movement of the anchorage unit whilst causing movement of other teeth. Conventional methods of anchorage con...

Back to Top