Flapless Mops for Acceleration of Canine Retraction

Status Completed

Clinical Trial Summary

Clinical Trial Description

The aim of the present clinical study was directed to evaluate the effectiveness of micro-osteoperforations on the rate of canine retraction; in addition, the potential risk for root resorption during maxillary canine retraction.

This study was conducted on a total sample of 24 canines of 12 patients, 8 females and 4 males, with mean age was 16.17 ± 2.29 years old who required therapeutic extraction of maxillary 1st premolars and canine retraction. They were selected randomly from the Outpatient Clinic, Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dental Medicine (Boys), Al-Azhar University, Cairo, Egypt.

Both maxillary canines, in each patient, were randomly assigned to either an experimental side or the control side in a simple split-mouth design. In the experimental side, micro-osteoperforations was performed distal to the maxillary canine before starting retraction, while the canines in the contralateral control side were retracted without micro-osteoperforations.

Extraction was done at the start of the treatment, and before fitting of the orthodontic appliance. Then upper dental arches were leveled and aligned using conventional sequences of wires.

Three flapless micro-osteoperforations was performed by using orthodontic miniscrews distal to the maxillary canines in the experimental side before starting retraction. Each perforation was 1.6 mm in diameter and 3-4 mm depth into the bone. Canines were completely retracted on 0.016 × 0.022 ̋ stainless steel wires by using closed coil spring delivered 150 gm force.

Patients were followed up every 28 days until complete canine retraction. Routine orthodontic records were obtained for each patient before treatment.

Additionally, a full skull CBCT images were taken before treatment and immediately after canine retraction.

The rate of canine retraction was assessed clinically; in addition, cone beam CT (CBCT) scans were used to assess the amount of canine retraction root length changes. Also anchorage loss of first permanent molars were assessed.

The treatment results were compared clinically and radiographically (CBCT). ;

Study Design

Related Conditions & MeSH terms

Clinical Trial Details

NCT number	NCT04383600
Study type	Interventional
Source	Al-Azhar University
Contact
Status	Completed
Phase	N/A
Start date	September 1, 2017
Completion date	June 5, 2019

View Details

See also
Status	Clinical Trial	Phase
Active, not recruiting	`NCT05150665` - Evaluation of Mini and Macro-esthetics Following En- Masse Retraction Versus Two Step Retraction	N/A
Completed	`NCT04868721` - Evaluation of Two Approaches of Micro-osteoperforations (MOPs) During Orthodontic Canine Retraction	N/A
Completed	`NCT04631419` - Effects of Flapless Laser Corticotomy in Canine Retraction	N/A
Completed	`NCT04878939` - Evaluation of Incisors' Position Following Anterior Segment Retraction	N/A
Completed	`NCT04892056` - Evaluation of the Rate of Anterior Segment Retraction Using Two Types of Mechanics	N/A
Active, not recruiting	`NCT04902456` - Evaluation of the Anchorage Loss During En-masse Retraction in Orthodontic Patients With Maxillary Protrusion	N/A
Completed	`NCT04902430` - Evaluation of the Rate of En-masse Retraction in Orthodontic Patients With Maxillary Protrusion	N/A
Completed	`NCT05183451` - Effect Of Low Level Laser Therapy on the Rate of En- Masse Retraction: RCT	N/A
Completed	`NCT04921579` - Evaluation of Treatment Duration of En-masse Versus Two Steps Retraction in Patients Having Maxillary Protrusion	N/A
Recruiting	`NCT03903575` - 3D Comparison of Anterior Teeth Retraction and Anchorage Control Between En-masse and Two-step Mechanics	N/A
Completed	`NCT04887974` - Canine Retraction With Temporary Anchorage Devices	N/A
Recruiting	`NCT04905004` - Efficiency of Canine Retraction Using Different Reactivation Intervals	N/A
Not yet recruiting	`NCT03074370` - Evaluation of Smile Esthetics in Orthodontically Treated Patients With Bimaxillary-dentoalveolar Protrusion	N/A

Clinical trials are conducted in a series of steps, called phases - each phase is designed to answer a separate research question.

Phase 1: Researchers test a new drug or treatment in a small group of people for the first time to evaluate its safety, determine a safe dosage range, and identify side effects.
Phase 2: The drug or treatment is given to a larger group of people to see if it is effective and to further evaluate its safety.
Phase 3: The drug or treatment is given to large groups of people to confirm its effectiveness, monitor side effects, compare it to commonly used treatments, and collect information that will allow the drug or treatment to be used safely.
Phase 4: Studies are done after the drug or treatment has been marketed to gather information on the drug's effect in various populations and any side effects associated with long-term use.