Comparison of distalizing maxillary molar by implant anchorage and pendulum appliance
Xin Yan
Abstract
Xin Yan
Abstract
Objective To evaluate characters of micro-implant anchorage and pendulum appliance during maxillary molars distalization in Class II malocclusal patients. Methods 28 patients were divided into two groups equally. Measuring position changes of maxillary molars from 4 aspects and implant anchorage loss by maxillary central incisor. Results In implant anchorage group: the velocity of maxillary first molar distalizing was 1.2 mm per month, distal tipping 4.6°,buccal move 1.6mm, horizontal rotation 4.9°;maxillary central incisor do not move. In pendulum appliance group: the velocity of maxillary first molar distalizing was 0.8mm per month, distal tipping 12.6°,buccal move 0.5mm, horizontal rotation 2.8°; maxillary central incisor move mesially 0.5mm. Conclusion Two methods successfully distalized maxillary molars to appropriate positions. But implant anchorage is stronger than another. Then move mode of maxillary molar differenciate from each other.
A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Objective To evaluate characters of micro-implant anchorage and pendulum appliance during maxillary molars distalization in Class II malocclusal patients. Methods 28 patients were divided into two groups equally. Measuring position changes of maxillary molars from 4 aspects and implant anchorage loss by maxillary central incisor. Results In implant anchorage group: the velocity of maxillary first molar distalizing was 1.2 mm per month, distal tipping 4.6°,buccal move 1.6mm, horizontal rotation 4.9°;maxillary central incisor do not move. In pendulum appliance group: the velocity of maxillary first molar distalizing was 0.8mm per month, distal tipping 12.6°,buccal move 0.5mm, horizontal rotation 2.8°; maxillary central incisor move mesially 0.5mm. Conclusion Two methods successfully distalized maxillary molars to appropriate positions. But implant anchorage is stronger than another. Then move mode of maxillary molar differenciate from each other.
Key concepts: Molar, Maxillary molar, Implant, Orthodontics, Dentistry, Maxillary incisor, Maxillary central incisor, Medicine