TY - JOUR
T1 - Root resorption of maxillary incisors after traction of unilateral vs bilateral impacted canines with reinforced anchorage
AU - Arriola-Guillén, Luis Ernesto
AU - Ruíz-Mora, Gustavo Armando
AU - Rodríguez-Cárdenas, Yalil Augusto
AU - Aliaga-Del Castillo, Aron
AU - Dias-Da Silveira, Heraldo Luis
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2018 American Association of Orthodontists
PY - 2018/11
Y1 - 2018/11
N2 - Introduction: The aim of this study was to compare the root resorption (RR) of maxillary incisors after traction of unilateral vs bilateral impacted canines with reinforced anchorage. Methods: This retrospective longitudinal study included 60 cone-beam computed tomography scans of patients with maxillary impacted canines: 30 scans taken before and 30 taken after orthodontic traction with nickel-titanium coil springs. Two groups were formed according to the impaction condition: 15 with unilateral maxillary impacted canines and 15 with bilateral maxillary impacted canines. Three trained orthodontists made the measurements. Demographic variables, occlusal characteristics, skeletal class, and measurements related to canine impaction were collected from the clinical history, dental models, and radiographs of each patient. RR (mm and mm2) for each maxillary incisor was measured in 3 dimensions. Independent t or Mann-Whitney U tests were used, depending on data normality. Multiple linear regression analyses were used to evaluate the influence of all variables (predictors) on RR (α = 0.05). Results: RR did not show significant differences between groups in any section (P > 0.05). No subject had RR greater than 2 mm or 5 mm2. The specific influence of some predictor variables varied depending on the type of maxillary incisor. Conclusions: RR of maxillary incisors after traction of unilateral vs bilateral impacted canines with reinforced anchorage was similar and is not a risk to the integrity of the maxillary incisor root.
AB - Introduction: The aim of this study was to compare the root resorption (RR) of maxillary incisors after traction of unilateral vs bilateral impacted canines with reinforced anchorage. Methods: This retrospective longitudinal study included 60 cone-beam computed tomography scans of patients with maxillary impacted canines: 30 scans taken before and 30 taken after orthodontic traction with nickel-titanium coil springs. Two groups were formed according to the impaction condition: 15 with unilateral maxillary impacted canines and 15 with bilateral maxillary impacted canines. Three trained orthodontists made the measurements. Demographic variables, occlusal characteristics, skeletal class, and measurements related to canine impaction were collected from the clinical history, dental models, and radiographs of each patient. RR (mm and mm2) for each maxillary incisor was measured in 3 dimensions. Independent t or Mann-Whitney U tests were used, depending on data normality. Multiple linear regression analyses were used to evaluate the influence of all variables (predictors) on RR (α = 0.05). Results: RR did not show significant differences between groups in any section (P > 0.05). No subject had RR greater than 2 mm or 5 mm2. The specific influence of some predictor variables varied depending on the type of maxillary incisor. Conclusions: RR of maxillary incisors after traction of unilateral vs bilateral impacted canines with reinforced anchorage was similar and is not a risk to the integrity of the maxillary incisor root.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85055700873&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.ajodo.2018.01.015
DO - 10.1016/j.ajodo.2018.01.015
M3 - Artículo
C2 - 30384935
AN - SCOPUS:85055700873
SN - 0889-5406
VL - 154
SP - 645
EP - 656
JO - American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
JF - American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
IS - 5
ER -