Anchorage control using miniscrews in comparison to Essix appliance in treatment of postpubertal patients with Class II malocclusion using Carrière Motion Appliance

To evaluate anchorage control using miniscrews vs an Essix appliance in treatment of Class II malocclusion by distalization using the Carrière Motion Appliance (CMA). Twenty-four postpubertal female patients with Class II, division 1 malocclusion were randomly distributed into two equal groups. CMA...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:The Angle orthodontist 2022-01, Vol.92 (1), p.45-54
Main Authors: Fouda, Ahmed S, Attia, Khaled H, Abouelezz, Amr M, El-Ghafour, Mohamed Abd, Aboulfotouh, Mai H
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Adolescent
Cephalometry
Female
Humans
Malocclusion, Angle Class II - diagnostic imaging
Malocclusion, Angle Class II - therapy
Maxilla
Orthodontic Anchorage Procedures
Orthodontic Appliance Design
Tooth Movement Techniques
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:To evaluate anchorage control using miniscrews vs an Essix appliance in treatment of Class II malocclusion by distalization using the Carrière Motion Appliance (CMA). Twenty-four postpubertal female patients with Class II, division 1 malocclusion were randomly distributed into two equal groups. CMA was bonded in both groups, and one group was treated with miniscrews as anchorage (12 patients, mean age = 18.0 years) while the other group was treated with an Essix appliance as anchorage (12 patients, mean age = 17.8 years). For each patient, two cone-beam computed tomographic scans were obtained: one preoperatively and another after completion of distalization. In the Essix appliance group, there was a statistically significant anterior movement (2.2 ± 1.43 mm) as well as proclination of the lower incisor (5.3° ± 4.0°), compared to a nonsignificant anterior movement (0.06 ± 1.45 mm) and proclination (0.86° ± 2.22°) in the miniscrew group. The amount of maxillary molar distalization was higher in the miniscrew group (2.57 ± 1.52 mm) than in the Essix appliance group (1.53 ± 1.11 mm); however, the difference was not statistically significant. Miniscrews led to a decrease in the amount of anchorage loss in the mandibular incisors, both in terms of anterior movement and proclination.
ISSN:0003-3219
1945-7103
DOI:10.2319/021421-126.1