The korean journal of orthodontics (대한치과교정학회지)

The Korean Association Of Orthodontists (대한치과교정학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

En-masse retraction with a preformed nickel-titanium and stainless steel archwire assembly and temporary skeletal anchorage devices without posterior bonding

  • Jee, Jeong-Hyun (Department of Orthodontics, Postgraduate School of Dentistry, The Catholic University of Korea) ;
  • Ahn, Hyo-Won (Department of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, Kyung Hee University) ;
  • Seo, Kyung-Won (Department of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, Kyung Hee University) ;
  • Kim, Seong-Hun (Department of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, Kyung Hee University) ;
  • Kook, Yoon-Ah (Department of Orthodontics, Postgraduate School of Dentistry, The Catholic University of Korea) ;
  • Chung, Kyu-Rhim (Department of Orthodontics, Ajou University School of Medicine) ;
  • Nelson, Gerald (Division of Orthodontics, Department of Orofacial Science, University of California)
  • Received : 2013.10.09
  • Accepted : 2013.12.17
  • Published : 2014.09.25
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the therapeutic effects of a preformed assembly of nickel-titanium (NiTi) and stainless steel (SS) archwires (preformed C-wire) combined with temporary skeletal anchorage devices (TSADs) as the sole source of anchorage and to compare these effects with those of a SS version of C-wire (conventional C-wire) for en-masse retraction. Methods: Thirty-one adult female patients with skeletal Class I or II dentoalveolar protrusion, mild-to-moderate anterior crowding (3.0-6.0 mm), and stable Class I posterior occlusion were divided into conventional (n = 15) and preformed (n = 16) C-wire groups. All subjects underwent first premolar extractions and en-masse retraction with preadjusted edgewise anterior brackets, the assigned C-wire, and maxillary C-tubes or C-implants; bonded mesh-tube appliances were used in the mandibular dentition. Differences in pretreatment and post-retraction measurements of skeletal, dental, and soft-tissue cephalometric variables were statistically analyzed. Results: Both groups showed full retraction of the maxillary anterior teeth by controlled tipping and space closure without altered posterior occlusion. However, the preformed C-wire group had a shorter retraction period (by 3.2 months). Furthermore, the maxillary molars in this group showed no significant mesialization, mesial tipping, or extrusion; some mesialization and mesial tipping occurred in the conventional C-wire group. Conclusions: Preformed C-wires combined with maxillary TSADs enable simultaneous leveling and space closure from the beginning of the treatment without maxillary posterior bonding. This allows for faster treatment of dentoalveolar protrusion without unwanted side effects, when compared with conventional C-wire, evidencing its clinical expediency.

Keywords

References

  1. Bennett JC, McLaughlin RP. Controlled space closure with a preadjusted appliance system. J Clin Orthod 1990;24:251-60.
  2. Klontz HA. Tweed-Merrifield sequential directional force treatment. Semin Orthod 1996;2:254-67. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1073-8746(96)80025-9
  3. Kanomi R. Mini-implant for orthodontic anchorage. J Clin Orthod 1997;31:763-7.
  4. 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.12.022
  5. Block MS, Hoffman DR. A new device for absolute anchorage for orthodontics. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1995;107:251-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-5406(95)70140-0
  6. Chung KR, Kim YS, Linton JL, Lee YJ. The miniplate with tube for skeletal anchorage. J Clin Orthod 2002;36:407-12.
  7. Ahn HW, Chung KR, Kang SM, Lin L, Nelson G, Kim SH. Correction of dental Class III with posterior open bite by simple biomechanics using an anterior C-tube miniplate. Korean J Orthod 2012;42:270-8. https://doi.org/10.4041/kjod.2012.42.5.270
  8. Chung KR, Cho JH, Kim SH, Kook YA, Cozzani M. Unusual extraction treatment in Class II division 1 using C-orthodontic mini-implants. Angle Orthod 2007;77:155-66. https://doi.org/10.2319/020106-35R.1
  9. Chung KR, Choo H, Lee JH, Kim SH. Atypical orthodontic extraction pattern managed by differential en-masse retraction against a temporary skeletal anchorage device in the treatment of bimaxillary protrusion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2011; 140:423-32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2009.08.036
  10. Chung KR, Jeong DM, Kim SH, Ko YI, Nelson G. En-masse retraction dependent on a temporary skeletal anchorage device without posterior bonding or banding in an adult with severe bidentoalveolar protrusion: seven years posttreatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2012;141:484-94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2010.06.028
  11. Kim SH, Hwang YS, Ferreira A, Chung KR. Analysis of temporary skeletal anchorage devices used for enmasse retraction: a preliminary study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2009;136:268-76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2007.08.023
  12. Chung KR, Kim SH, Kook YA. C-orthodontic miniimplant. In: Cope JB, ed. OrthoTADs book: Clinical guideline and atlas. Dallas, TX: Under Dog Media; 2007. p. 248.
  13. Chung KR, Kim SH, Kook YA. The C-orthodontic micro-implant. J Clin Orthod 2004;38:478-86.
  14. Giancotti A, Greco M. Modified sliding mechanics in extraction cases with a bidimensional approach. Prog Orthod 2010;11:157-65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pio.2010.07.002
  15. Mandall N, Lowe C, Worthington H, Sandler J, Derwent S, Abdi-Oskouei M, et al. Which orthodontic archwire sequence? A randomized clinical trial. Eur J Orthod 2006;28:561-6. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjl030
  16. Garrec P, Tavernier B, Jordan L. Evolution of flexural rigidity according to the cross-sectional dimension of a superelastic nickel titanium orthodontic wire. Eur J Orthod 2005;27:402-7. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cji014
  17. Gurgel JA, Kerr S, Powers JM, LeCrone V. Forcedeflection properties of superelastic nickel-titanium archwires. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2001; 120:378-82. https://doi.org/10.1067/mod.2001.117200
  18. Sia S, Shibazaki T, Koga Y, Yoshida N. Experimental determination of optimal force system required for control of anterior tooth movement in sliding mechanics. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2009; 135:36-41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2007.01.034
  19. Mo SS, Kim SH, Sung SJ, Chung KR, Chun YS, Kook YA, et al. Factors controlling anterior torque during C-implant-dependent en-masse retraction without posterior appliances. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2011;140:72-80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2009.09.026
  20. Mo SS, Kim SH, Sung SJ, Chung KR, Chun YS, Kook YA, et al. Factors controlling anterior torque with C-implants depend on en-masse retraction without posterior appliances: biocreative therapy type II technique. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2011;139:e183-91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2010.09.023

Cited by

  1. Application of the 2-piece orthodontic C-implant for provisional restoration with laser welded customized coping: a case report vol.11, pp.None, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1186/s13005-015-0066-9
  2. Gene Profiling of Bone around Orthodontic Mini-Implants by RNA-Sequencing Analysis vol.2015, pp.None, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/538080
  3. Single-Tooth Osteotomy Combined Wide Linear Corticotomy Under Local Anesthesia for Correcting Anterior Protrusion With Ectopically Erupted Canine vol.28, pp.1, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1097/scs.0000000000003179
  4. Control of anterior segment using an antero-posterior lingual sliding retraction system: a preliminary cone-beam CT study vol.19, pp.None, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1186/s40510-017-0202-0
  5. Evaluation of treatment outcomes of en masse retraction with temporary skeletal anchorage devices in comparison with two-step retraction with conventional anchorage in patients with dentoalveolar prot vol.9, pp.4, 2014, https://doi.org/10.4103/ccd.ccd_661_18
  6. Efficacy of orthodontic mini implants for en masse retraction in the maxilla: a systematic review and meta-analysis vol.4, pp.None, 2014, https://doi.org/10.1186/s40729-018-0144-4
  7. Type of tooth movement during en masse retraction of the maxillary anterior teeth using labial versus lingual biocreative therapy in adults: A randomized clinical trial vol.49, pp.6, 2014, https://doi.org/10.4041/kjod.2019.49.6.381
  8. Finite element study of controlling factors of anterior intrusion and torque during Temporary Skeletal Anchorage Device (TSAD) dependent en masse retraction without posterior appliances: Biocreative h vol.90, pp.2, 2014, https://doi.org/10.2319/050619-315.1
  9. Critical issues concerning biocreative strategy in contemporary temporary skeletal anchorage device orthodontics: A narrative review vol.24, pp.suppl, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1111/ocr.12444