Comparison of mesializing mandibular molar by micro implant anchorage and intraoral anchorage
Xingwei Cai
Abstract
Xingwei Cai
Abstract
Objective To evaluate characters of micro-implant anchorage and intraoral anchorage during mandibular molars mesialization in Class I malocclusal patients. Methods 24 patients were divided into two groups equally. Measuring position changes of mandibular molars from 2 aspects and implant anchorage loss by mandibular central incisor. Results In implant anchorage group: the velocity of mandibular second molar mesializing was 0.82 mm per month, mesial tipping 2.5° , mandibular central incisor do not move.In intraoral anchorage group: the velocity of mandibular second molar mesializing was 0.76 mm per month, mesial tipping 7.5° , mandibular central incisor move bucally 3.0mm. Conclusion Two methods successfully mesialized maxillary molars to appropriate positions. But implant anchorage is stronger than another. Then move mode of mandibular 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 intraoral anchorage during mandibular molars mesialization in Class I malocclusal patients. Methods 24 patients were divided into two groups equally. Measuring position changes of mandibular molars from 2 aspects and implant anchorage loss by mandibular central incisor. Results In implant anchorage group: the velocity of mandibular second molar mesializing was 0.82 mm per month, mesial tipping 2.5° , mandibular central incisor do not move.In intraoral anchorage group: the velocity of mandibular second molar mesializing was 0.76 mm per month, mesial tipping 7.5° , mandibular central incisor move bucally 3.0mm. Conclusion Two methods successfully mesialized maxillary molars to appropriate positions. But implant anchorage is stronger than another. Then move mode of mandibular molar differenciate from each other.
Key concepts: Molar, Implant, Dentistry, Mandibular first molar, Mandibular second molar, Orthodontics, Mandibular lateral incisor, Incisor