Comparative Evaluation Of Combination And Conventional Stainless Steel Arch-Wire For En-Mass Space Closure: A Randomized Clinical Study
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Aim: To compare and evaluate the rate of space closure by combination stainless steel arch-wire and conventional stainless steel arch-wire for en-mass space closure.
Materials and Methods: Random selection of twenty patients with treatment plan of first premolar extractions was done. After alignment and leveling up to 0.019˝ × 0.025˝ NiTi archwire a lateral cephalogram and orthodontic study model had been taken as a part of pre-retraction records. Two groups were formed depending on the type of archwire used for extraction space closure. Patients were randomly and equally divided into the two groups with the use of research randomizer software. Group-A: Control group was given conventional rectangular stainless steel arch wire (0.019˝ × 0.025˝) and Group-B: Experimental group was given combination stainless steel arch wire (0.019˝ × 0.025˝
(Anterior) / 0.019˝ (Posterior). For en-mass retraction force of 200 gm/side was applied with use of NiTi closed coil springs. The springs were engaged from micro implant located between second premolar and first molar to the crimpable hooks positioned distal to the lateral incisor on the archwire. Post-retraction records (lateral cephalogram and study model) were obtained when the remaining extraction space was 0.5 mm. This was done to avoid time delay between the extraction space closure and reporting of the participants.
Results: Proportion of female participant was 80% in conventional arch wire group (Group A) and 70% in combination arch wire group (Group B) .With the help of Bivariate analysis, Chi- square value was observed to be 0.267 found with p value >0.05 which indicated no significant difference in gender distribution between two groups. Independent t- test showed significant reduction in canine distance at pre and post en mass retraction stage with both group. Paired t- test showed rate of retraction with combination arch wire group (0.94 mm/months) (Group B) faster than conventional arch wire group (0.89 mm/months) (Group A). There was no statistical significant difference in the retraction rate between two group.
Conclusion: En mass retraction rate was faster with the use of combination arch wire when compared with conventional arch wire. In the combination arch wire group, lingual roll -in of molars was found. However, no statistical significance was found between both the groups
Downloads
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
References
Proffit W.R., Fields H.W., Sarver D.M. fourth ed. Mosby Elsevier; St. Louis, MO: 2007. Contemporary Orthodontics.
Staggers, J. A. and N. Germane. Clinical considerations in the use of retraction mechanics. J Clin Orthod 1991. 25:364–369.
Heo W, Nahm D.S, and Baek S.H . En Masse Retraction and Two-Step Retraction of Maxillary Anterior Teeth in Adult Class I Women. Angle Orthod. 2007, Vol. 77, No. 6, pp. 973-978.
Al-Sibaie S,. Hajeer M.Y. Assessment of changes following en-masse retraction with micro-implants anchorage compared to two-step retraction with conventional anchorage in patients with class II division 1 malocclusion: a randomized controlled trial. Eur J Orthod. 2014 Jun;36(3):275-83.
Felemban N.H, Al-Sulaimani F.F. En masse retraction versus two-step retraction of anterior teeth in extraction treatment of bimaxillary protrusion. J Orthod Sci 2013 Jan;2(1):28-37.
Creekmore TD. Where the teeth should be positioned in the face and jaws and how to get them there. J Clin Orthod. 1997;31:586-608.
Park H.S., Kwon T.G. Sliding mechanics with microscrew implant anchorage. Angle Orthod.2004;74(5):703–710.
Upadhyay M, Yadav S, Patil S. Micro-implant anchorage for en-masse retraction of maxillary anterior teeth: a clinical cephalometric study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2008 Dec;134(6):803-10.
Ribeiro L.U, Jacob H. B. Understanding the basis of space closure in Orthodontics for a more efficient orthodontic treatment. Dental Press J Orthod. 2016 Mar-Apr; 21(2): 115– 125.
Weltman B, Vig KWL, Fields HW, Shanker S, Kaizar EE. Root resorption associated with orthodontic tooth movement: a systematic review. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2010;137(4):462–76.
Nanda R. Esthetics and biomechanics in orthodontics, 2nd ed. Elsevier Health Sciences, Missouri108–12 2015.
Siddharth S, Ranvijay, Subhash C, Ajoy K. S.A Comparison between Space closure by canine retraction with active tiebacks and closed coil springs: A Clinical Study with the MBT System.Int J Med Res Prof.2017; 3(3); 365-70.
Nightingale C, Jones SP. A clinical investigation of force delivery systems for orthodontic space closure. J Orthod. 2003 Sep; 30(3):229-36.
Bennett JC, McLaughlin RP. Controlled space closure with a preadjusted appliance system. J Clin Orthod 1990;24:251-60.
Klontz HA. Tweed-Merrifield sequential directional force treatment. Semin Orthod 1996;2:254-67.
Kanomi R. Mini-implant for orthodontic anchorage. J Clin Orthod 1997;31:763-7.
Yao CC, Lai EH, Chang JZ, Chen I, Chen YJ. Comparison of treatment outcomes between skeletal anchorage and extraoral anchorage in adults with maxillary dentoalveolar protrusion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2008;134:615-24.
Block MS, Hoffman DR. A new device for absolute anchorage for orthodontics. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1995;107:251-8.
Peter Z, Bengt I. A clinical study of maxillary canine retraction with a retraction spring and with sliding mechanics. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1989;95:99-106.
Kulshrestha RS, Tandon R, Chandra P. Canine retraction: A systematic review of different methods used. J Orthod Sci 2015; 4(1): 1.
Refined begg for modern times, 2nd ed. Dr.Vijay P. Jayade,73-74 2011.
Upadhyay M, Yadav S. Mini-implants for retraction, intrusion and protraction in a Class II division 1 patient. J Orthod. 2007 Sep;34(3):158-67.
Heo W, Nahm DS, Baek SH.. En Masse Retraction and Two-Step Retraction of Maxillary Anterior Teeth in Adult Class I Women. Angle Orthodontist, Vol 77, No 6, 2007
Zhang, Qiang D, Hua J, Yu L, Zhong, Ping. 3-D finite element study of en masse retraction of maxillary anterior teeth in two typical force directions. Chin J Dent Res. 2008;11:101-107.
Thiruvenkatachari B, Ammayappan P, Kandaswamy R. Comparison of rate of canine retraction with conventional molar anchorage and titanium implant anchorage, Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2008;134:30-5
Deguchi T, Murakami T, Kuroda S, Yabuuchi T, Kamioka H, Takano-Yamamoto T. Comparison of the intrusion effects on the maxillary incisors between implant anchorage and J-hook headgear. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2008 May;133(5):654-60.
Upadhyay M, Yadav S, Nagaraj K, Nanda R. Dentoskeletal and Soft Tissue Effects of Mini-Implants in Class II division 1 Patients. Angle Orthod. 2009:79(2)
Asim G, Ravi S, Shivalinga B.Comparative study between conventional en-masse retraction (sliding mechanics) and en-masse retraction using orthodontic micro implant. Implant Dent 2010;19:128 –136.
Tian-Min X,Xiaoyun Z,Hee S, Robert L. B, Edward L. K. Randomized clinical trial comparing control of maxillary anchorage with 2 retraction techniques. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2010;138:544.e1-544.
Liou EJ, Chang PM. Apical root resorption in orthodontic patients with en-masse maxillary anterior retraction and intrusion with miniscrews. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2010 Feb;137(2):207-12.
Burrow SJ. Canine retraction rate with self-ligating brackets vs conventional edgewise brackets. Angle Orthod. 2010 Jul;80(4):438-45.
Shivanand V, Rozario JE, Sangamesh B, Patil AK, Ganeshkar SV. Bonding power arms to standard molar tubes. J Clin Orthod. 2012 Mar;46(3):172-4.
de Lima Araújo LH, Zenóbio EG, Pacheco W, Cosso MG, Manzi FR, Shibli JA. Mass retraction movement of the anterior upper teeth using orthodontic mini-implants as anchorage. Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2012 Mar;16(1):95-9
Srinivas N, Reddy GH, Singh JR, Munje S. Evaluated the clinical efficiency of micro implant as an anchorage in comparison with conventional first molar anchorage,J Int Oral Health 2012; Vol 4(1)
Verma RK, Jena AK, Singh SP, Utreja AK. Removable molar power arm, CCD,2013;Jul-Sep 4 (3)
Felemban NH, Al‑Sulaimani1 FF, Murshid ZA and Hassan HA. En masse retraction versus two‑step retraction of anterior teeth in extraction treatment of bimaxillary protrusion, J Orthodo Jan-Mar 2013; 2 (1)
Sukhia RH, Sukhia HR, Mahdi S. Soft Tissue Changes With Retraction In Bi-Maxillary Protrusion Orthodontic Cases Pakistan Oral & Dental Journal, 2012:33(3)
Gnanasambandam V, Chidambaram SM, Arumugam M, Guiding jig for accurate placement of temporary anchorage implants. SRM Journal of Research in Dental Sciences. 2014: 5(1)
Jain RK, Kumar SP, Manjula W. Comparison of intrusion effects on maxillary incisors among mini implant anchorage, j-hook headgear and utility arch. J Clin Diagn Res. 2014 Jul;8(7):ZC21-4.
Chetan S, Keluskar KM, Vasisht VN, Revankar S. En-masse Retraction of the Maxillary Anterior Teeth by Applying Force from Four Different Levels - A Finite Element Study. J Clin Diagn Res. 2014 Sep;8(9):ZC26-30.
Jeong-Hyun J, Hyo-Won A, Kyung-Won S, Seong-Hun K.En-masse retraction with a preformed nickel-titanium and stainless steel archwire assembly and temporary skeletal anchorage devices without posterior bonding. Korean J Orthod 2014;44(5):236-245.
Charushila V C, Suchita M T. Comparison of rate of retraction and anchorage loss using nickel titanium closed coil springs and elastomeric chain during the en-masse retraction: A clinical study. J Orthod Res 2015:129-33.;30.
Ibrahim G. Comparison of the Amount of Anchorage Loss of the Molars with and without the Use of Implant Anchorage during Anterior Segment Retraction Combined with Alveolar Corticotomies. J Dent Health Oral Disord Ther 2015, 2(5): 00067
Siddharth S, Ranvijay, Subhash C, Ajoy K. A Comparison between space closure by canine retraction with active tiebacks and closed coil springs: A Clinical Study with the MBT System. Int J Med Res Prof.2017; 3(3); 365-70.
Antoszewska-Smith J, Sarul M, Łyczek J, Konopka T, Kawala B. Effectiveness of orthodontic miniscrew implants in anchorage reinforcement during en-masse retraction: a systematic review and meta-analysis. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. 2017 Mar 1;151(3):440-55.
Becker K, Pliska A, Busch C, Wilmes B, Wolf M, Drescher D. Efficacy of orthodontic mini implants for en masse retraction in the maxilla: a systematic review and metaanalysis. International journal of implant dentistry. 2018 Dec;4(1):1-2.
Hamid F, Bangash AA, Saeed M, Tariq S, Khan M. Comparison of rate of retraction of canine on round and rectangular wires. Pakistan Armed Forces Medical Journal. 2020 Jun 29;70(3):740-45.
Reitan K. Effects on force magnitude and direction of tooth movement on different alveolar bone types. Angle Orthod. 1964;34:244–247
.Reitan K. Clinical and histological observation on tooth movement during and after orthodontic treatment. Am J Orthod. 1967;53:721–745.
Graber T, Vanarsdall R. Orthodontics, Current Principles and Techniques. St Louis, Mo: Mosby; 1994:215–216.
Burstone CJ. The biomechanics of tooth movement. In: Krauss BS, Riedel RA, eds. Vistas in Orthodontics. Philadelphia, PA: Lea & Febiger; 1962:197–213.
Reitan K. Some factors determining the evaluation of forces in orthodontics. Am J Orthod. 1957;43:32–45.
Ribeiro GLU, Jacob HB. Understanding the basis of space closure in orthodontics for a more efficient orthodontic treatment. Dent Press J Orthod. 2016;21:115–25.
Park HS, Kwon TG, Kwon OW. Treatment of open bite with microscrew implant anchorage. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2004 Nov;126(5):627-36.
Creekmore, T.D., Eklund, M.K., 1983. The possibility of skeletal anchorage. J. Clin. Orthod. 17 (4), 266–269.
De Pauw, G.A., Dermaut, L., De Bruyn, H., Johansson, C., 1999. Stability of implants as anchorage for orthopedic traction. Angle Orthod. 69 (5), 401–407.
Park, H.S., Bae, S.M., Kyung, H.M., Sung, J.H., 2001. Micro-implant anchorage for treatment of skeletal Class I bialveolar protrusion. J. Clin. Orthod. 35 (7), 417–422.
Chae, J.M., 2006. A new protocol of Tweed-Merrifield directional force technology with microimplant anchorage. Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop. 130 (1), 100–109.
Miyawaki, S., Koyama, I., Inoue, M., Mishima, K., Sugahara, T., Takano-Yamamoto, T., 2003. Factors associated with the stability of titanium screws placed in the posterior region for orthodontic anchorage. Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop. 124 (4), 373–378
Parker RJ, Harris EI. Direction of orthodontic tooth movements associated with external apical root resorption of the maxillary central incisors. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1998;114:677- 83
Giancotti A, Greco M. Modified sliding mechanics in extraction cases with a bidimensional approach. Prog Orthod 2010;11:157-65.
Mandall N, Lowe C, Worthington H, Sandler J, Derwent S, Abdi-Oskouei M, et al. Which orthodontic archwire sequence? A randomized clinical
Chung KR, Kim SH, Kook YA. The C-orthodontic micro-implant. J Clin Orthod 2004;38:478-86.
Prem N, Mascarenhas R, Husain A, Hashim A. Comparison of sliding mechanics and loop mechanics in orthodontic tooth movement: A three dimensional finite element study. NT J Comp Meth-sing 2017; 17(2): 305-14.