Authors : Dr. Sharath Kumar Shetty; Dr. Revanth S. Soonthodu; Dr. Gundappa Matur

Volume/Issue : Volume 9 - 2024, Issue 5 - May

Google Scholar : https://tinyurl.com/489uat8m

Scribd : https://tinyurl.com/3fa2fcjv

DOI : https://doi.org/10.38124/ijisrt/IJISRT24MAY1304

Note : A published paper may take 4-5 working days from the publication date to appear in PlumX Metrics, Semantic Scholar, and ResearchGate.

Abstract : Aim The aim of this study will be to compare the amount of root resorption of maxillary anterior retracted with anterior TADs,regular TADs and without skeletal anchorage.  Materials and methods: Samples for the study will be the patients undergone orthodontic treatment at the Department of Orthodontics,K.V.G. Dental College and Hospital, Sullia Sample size of 45 patients will be divided in to 3 groups . ,Group 1 consists of patients treated with anterior TADs, Group2 consists of patients treated with regular TADs and Group 3 consists of patients treated without skeletal anchorage for retraction of maxillary anteriors. Root resorption will be measured by comparing pretreatment and post treatment intraoral periapical radiographs (IOPAR) radiographs.  Result- The study meticulously compared root resorption levels among three groups: Conventional, Anterior Temporary Anchorage Devices (TADs), and Posterior TADs. Anterior TADs exhibited the highest mean root resorption, significantly higher than both Conventional and Posterior TADs. Statistical analyses confirmed these differences, highlighting the impact of anchorage method on root resorption. Pairwise comparisons and confidence intervals further supported the findings, emphasizing the nuanced variations observed.

References :

1. Barros, S. E., Janson, G., Chiqueto, K., Baldo, V. O., &Baldo, T. O. (2017). Root resorption of maxillary incisors retracted with and without skeletal anchorage. American Journal of Orthodontics and DentofacialOrthopedics, 151(2), 397-406.
2. Park J, Shin K. An Overview of Clinical Applications for Temporary Anchorage Devices (TADs). In: Park J, ed. Temporary Anchorage Devices in Clinical Orthodontics. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Blackwell; 2020:1-15. 2. Proffit WR Jr, Fields HW, Larson BE, Sarver DM. Combined surgical.
3. Wang Q, Chen W, Smales RJ, Peng H, Hu X, Yin L. Apical root resorption in maxillary incisors when employing microimplant and J-hook headgear anchorage: a 4-month radiographic study. J HuazhongUnivSciTechnolog Med Sci 2012;32:767-73. 4. Levander E, Malmgren O.
4. Evaluation of the risk of root resorption during orthodontic treatment: a study of upper incisors. Eur J Orthod 1988;10:30-8.
5. Yao CC, Lai EH, Chang JZ, Chen I, Chen YJ. Comparison of treatment outcomes between skeletal anchorage and extraoral anchorage in adults with Bibliography 50 maxillary dentoalveolar protrusion. Am J OrthodDentofacialOrthop 2008;134:615-24.
6. Upadhyay M, Yadav S, Nagaraj K, Patil S. Treatment effects of mini-implants for en-masse retraction of anterior teeth in bialveolar dental protrusion patients: a randomized controlled trial. Am J OrthodDentofacialOrthop 2008;134:18-29.
7. Ormco Corp; 1995. p. 50-60. 8. Herman R, Cope J. Temporary anchorage devices in orthodontics: Mini implants. SeminOrthod 2005;11:32-9.
8. Dalstra M, Cattaneo PM, Melsen B. Load transfer of miniscrews for orthodontic anchorage. Orthod 2004;1:53-62.
9. Ottoni JM, Oliveira ZF, Mansini R, Cabral AM. Correlation between placement torque and survival of single-tooth implants. Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 2005;20:769-76.
10. Dalstra M, Cattaneo PM, Melsen B. Load transfer of miniscrews for orthodontic anchorage. Orthod 2004;1:53-62.
11. Remington DN, Joondeph DR, Artun J, Riedel RA, Chapko MK. Long-term evaluation of root resorption occurring during orthodontic treatment. Am J OrthodDentofacialOrthop. 1989 Jul;96(1):43-6.
12. Alves A, Cacho A, San Roman F, Gerós H, Afonso A. Mini implants osseointegration, molar intrusion and root resorption in Sinclair minipigs. IntOrthod. 2019 Dec;17(4):733-743.
13. Carrillo R, Rossouw PE, Franco PF, Opperman LA, Buschang PH. Intrusion of multiradicular teeth and related root resorption with mini-screw implant anchorage: a radiographic evaluation. Am J OrthodDentofacialOrthop. 2007 Nov;132(5):647-55.
14. Apajalahti S, Peltola JS. Apical root resorption after orthodontic treatment -- a retrospective study. Eur JOrthod. 2007 Aug;29(4):408-12.
15. Wilmes B, Su YY, Drescher D. Insertion angle impact on primary stability of orthodontic mini-implants. Angle Orthod. 2008 May;78(3):406-11.
16. Malmgren O, Goldson L, Hill C, Orwin A, Petrini L, Lundberg M. Root resorption after orthodontic treatment of traumatized teeth. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1982 Nov;82(5):487-91.
17. Park HS, Kwon OW, Sung JH. Micro-implant anchorage for treatment of skeletal Class I bialveolar protrusion. J Clin Orthod. 2001 Feb;35(2):417-22.
18. Park HS, Lee SK, Kwon OW. Group distal movement of teeth using microscrew implant anchorage. Angle Orthod. 2005 May;75(3):602-9.
19. Liou EJ, Pai BC. A modified protraction headgear for maxillary protraction in mixed dentition: a preliminary report. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1995 Nov;108(5):583-90.
20. Baumgaertel S, Hans MG. Buccal cortical bone thickness for mini-implant placement. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2009 May;135(5):566-73.
21. Verna C, Dalstra M, Melsen B. The rate of en-masse retraction of maxillary anterior teeth during micro-implant treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2019 Nov;156(5):636-644.
22. Park HS, Bae SM, Kyung HM, Sung JH. Micro-implant anchorage for forced eruption of impacted canines. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2001 Nov;120(5):546-52.