| ORIGINAL ARTICLE |
|
| Year : 2021 | Volume
: 10
| Issue : 1 | Page : 468-474 |
|
|
A clinical comparative study using anchorage from mini-implants and conventional anchorage methods to retract anterior teeth
Abhita Malhotra1, Rajat Mangla2, Vinay S Dua3, Sridhar Kannan1, Nitin Arora1, Ashish Kumar Singh1
1 Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, Manav Rachna Dental College, FDS, MRIIRS, Faridabad, Haryana, India
2 Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, Maharishi Markandeshwar College of Dental Sciences and Research Institute, Mullana, Ambala, India
3 National Dental College and Hospital, Derabassi, Mohali, Punjab, India
Correspondence Address:
Dr. Abhita Malhotra
3, Link Road, Jangpura Extension, New Delhi - 110014
India
 Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None  | Check |
DOI: 10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_841_20
|
|
|
Background: Proclined teeth has been one of the main reasons for compromised esthetics. In a patient with proclined anteriors, retraction is done after 1st premolar extraction. Absolute/maximum anchorage is required to achieve the best esthetics. Objective: We conducted this study with the aim of retracting the proclined maxillary anterior teeth and to check for efficient retraction, type of tooth movement during retraction, and amount of anchorage loss. Methods: Patients with proclined anterior teeth where therapeutic extraction of first premolars is required were included in the study, where anchorage was taken with mini-implants in one group, and in the second group, conventional anchorage method of 1st and 2nd molar banding with TPA was chosen. Each group consisted of 8 subjects. Lateral cephalogram was taken both preretraction and 4 months after starting retraction to compare anchor loss, rate of retraction, and type of tooth movement of retracted anteriors, in both groups. Results: The retraction in the implant group was more than in the conventional group and the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.05). Anchorage loss was seen to be greater in conventional group than in the implant group and was also significant statistically. The type of tooth movement of the anterior teeth on retraction was also compared, with the implant group showing predominantly controlled tipping and the conventional group showing uncontrolled tipping movement.
|
|
|
|
| [FULL TEXT] [PDF]* |
|
 |
|
