Comparison between direct vs indirect anchorage in two miniscrewsupported distalizing devices

28Citations
Citations of this article
102Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Objective: To compare two distalizing devices supported by palatal miniscrews, the MGBM System (MGBM) and the Distal Screw appliance (DS), in dental Class II patients. Materials and Methods: Pretreatment (T1) and postdistalization (T2) lateral cephalograms of 53 Class II malocclusion subjects were examined. MGBM consisted of 29 patients (16 males, 13 females) with a mean pretreatment age of 12.3 ± 1.5 years; DS consisted of 24 patients (11 males, 13 females) with a mean pretreatment age of 11.3 ± 1.2 years. The mean distalization time was ± 6 2 months for MGBM and 9 ± 2 months for DS. Initial and final measurements and treatment changes were compared by means of a Student's t-test. Results: Maxillary superimpositions showed that the maxillary first molar distalized an average of 5.5 mm in the MGBM and 3.2 mm in the DS between T1 and T2; distal molar tipping was greater in the MGBM (10.3°) than in the DS (3.0°). First premolar showed a mean mesial movement of 1.4 mm, with a mesial tipping of 4.4° in the MGBM; on the contrary, first premolar showed a distal movement of 2.2 mm, with a distal tipping of 6.2u, in the DS. Conclusions: The MGBM system resulted in greater distal molar movement and less treatment time, resulting in more efficient movement than was associated with the DS; DS showed less molar tipping during distalization.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Cozzani, M., Fontana, M., Maino, G., Maino, G., Palpacelli, L., & Caprioglio, A. (2016). Comparison between direct vs indirect anchorage in two miniscrewsupported distalizing devices. Angle Orthodontist, 86(3), 399–406. https://doi.org/10.2319/040715-231.1

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free