OBJECTIVES: This randomized clinical trial investigated the effect of extracorporeal shock waves on the amount of orthodontic tooth movement and periodontal parameters. MATERIAL AND METHODS:Twenty-six adult orthodontic patients participated in this clinical trial; all of them receiving lower second molar mesially directed movement. The fixed orthodontic device included superelastic coil springs (200 cN) and miniscrews as temporary anchorage device. The active treatment group received a single shock wave treatment with 1,000 impulses in the region of tooth movement. The placebo group was treated with deactivated shock wave applicator with an acoustic sham. The study period lasted 4 months with a monthly data exploration. RESULTS: No statistically significant difference in posterior-anterior tooth movement between the treatment and placebo group was seen during observation period. Gender had no significant influence on tooth movement in either group. No significant difference occurred in mesio-distal tipping and rotation, but a significant difference (p = 0.035) in bucco-lingual tipping of the molars was found. Periodontal status of the patients (sulcus probing depth, gingival index) did not significantly differ in both groups. The plaque index showed a significant difference (p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Single application of extracorporeal shock wave treatment was associated neither with a statistically significant acceleration of tooth movement nor with an altered periodontal status in vivo. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Shock waves showed no harmful effects in the investigated area. Their clinical use for lithotripsy during orthodontic therapy might be permitted.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES: This randomized clinical trial investigated the effect of extracorporeal shock waves on the amount of orthodontic tooth movement and periodontal parameters. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Twenty-six adult orthodontic patients participated in this clinical trial; all of them receiving lower second molar mesially directed movement. The fixed orthodontic device included superelastic coil springs (200 cN) and miniscrews as temporary anchorage device. The active treatment group received a single shock wave treatment with 1,000 impulses in the region of tooth movement. The placebo group was treated with deactivated shock wave applicator with an acoustic sham. The study period lasted 4 months with a monthly data exploration. RESULTS: No statistically significant difference in posterior-anterior tooth movement between the treatment and placebo group was seen during observation period. Gender had no significant influence on tooth movement in either group. No significant difference occurred in mesio-distal tipping and rotation, but a significant difference (p = 0.035) in bucco-lingual tipping of the molars was found. Periodontal status of the patients (sulcus probing depth, gingival index) did not significantly differ in both groups. The plaque index showed a significant difference (p = 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Single application of extracorporeal shock wave treatment was associated neither with a statistically significant acceleration of tooth movement nor with an altered periodontal status in vivo. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Shock waves showed no harmful effects in the investigated area. Their clinical use for lithotripsy during orthodontic therapy might be permitted.
Authors: Laura R Iwasaki; Larry D Crouch; Albert Tutor; Scott Gibson; Navin Hukmani; David B Marx; Jeffrey C Nickel Journal: Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop Date: 2005-10 Impact factor: 2.650
Authors: Phimon Atsawasuwan; Yinghua Chen; Karan Ganjawalla; Albert L Kelling; Carla A Evans Journal: Head Face Med Date: 2018-11-12 Impact factor: 2.151