OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare the treatment effects of palatally vs buccally placed temporary anchorage devices. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Of 40 Class II division 1 malocclusion patients, 22 were treated with modified C-palatal plate (MCPP) appliances (age 21.9 ± 6.6 years), and 18 (age 24.2 ± 6.8 years) were treated with buccally placed miniscrews between the maxillary first molar and second premolar. A total of 26 linear and angular measurements were analyzed on pre- and posttreatment lateral cephalograms. Multivariate analysis of variance was performed to evaluate the treatment effects within each group and to compare the effects between groups. RESULTS: Overall, the MCPP appliances showed 4.2 mm of distalization, 1.6 mm of intrusion of the first molar with 2° tipping, and 0.8 mm extrusion of incisors. The miniscrew group resulted in 2.0 mm of distalization, 0.1 mm intrusion of the first molar with 7.2° tipping, and 0.3 mm of incisor extrusion. Regarding soft tissue change, in the MCPP group, the upper lip was significantly retracted ( P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Comparing the treatment effects between MCPP appliances and buccal miniscrews, the MCPP appliances showed greater distalization and intrusion with less distal tipping of the first molar and less extrusion of the incisor compared to the buccal miniscrews.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare the treatment effects of palatally vs buccally placed temporary anchorage devices. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Of 40 Class II division 1 malocclusionpatients, 22 were treated with modified C-palatal plate (MCPP) appliances (age 21.9 ± 6.6 years), and 18 (age 24.2 ± 6.8 years) were treated with buccally placed miniscrews between the maxillary first molar and second premolar. A total of 26 linear and angular measurements were analyzed on pre- and posttreatment lateral cephalograms. Multivariate analysis of variance was performed to evaluate the treatment effects within each group and to compare the effects between groups. RESULTS: Overall, the MCPP appliances showed 4.2 mm of distalization, 1.6 mm of intrusion of the first molar with 2° tipping, and 0.8 mm extrusion of incisors. The miniscrew group resulted in 2.0 mm of distalization, 0.1 mm intrusion of the first molar with 7.2° tipping, and 0.3 mm of incisor extrusion. Regarding soft tissue change, in the MCPP group, the upper lip was significantly retracted ( P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Comparing the treatment effects between MCPP appliances and buccal miniscrews, the MCPP appliances showed greater distalization and intrusion with less distal tipping of the first molar and less extrusion of the incisor compared to the buccal miniscrews.
Authors: Frauke Beyling; Elisabeth Klang; Eva Niehoff; Rainer Schwestka-Polly; Hans-Joachim Helms; Dirk Wiechmann Journal: Head Face Med Date: 2021-06-29 Impact factor: 2.151