• Users Online: 126
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
Home About us Editorial board Ahead of print Current issue Search Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
CASE REPORT
Year : 2021  |  Volume : 12  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 37-43

En-masse intrusion and retraction with preadjusted edgewise appliance using two different sites of mini-implant placement


Department of Orthodontics, Saveetha Dental College, Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences, Saveetha University, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India

Correspondence Address:
Dr. A Sumathi Felicita
Department of Orthodontics, Saveetha Dental College, Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences, Saveetha University, 162, Poonamallee High Road, Chennai, Tamil Nadu
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/ijor.ijor_44_20

Rights and Permissions

This article compares the treatment outcome between two patients when en-masse intrusion and retraction of the maxillary anterior teeth were performed with mini-implants placed at different sites. Both the patients had a skeletal Class II malocclusion with Angle's Class I molar relation, Class I canine relation, proclination of upper and lower anterior teeth. In the first case, intrusion and retraction was done with conventional friction mechanics for space closure and an intrusive force from a mini-implant placed in the midline. In the second case, intrusion and retraction were done with the application of force from the anterior attachments to mini-implants placed between the second premolars and first permanent molar bilaterally. There was intrusion of the maxillary anterior teeth with both mechanics. However, the evaluation of treatment outcome at the end of space closure showed mesial movement of the maxillary first permanent molar in the first case. In the second case, distal movement and intrusion of the maxillary first permanent molar and decrease in the lower anterior facial height was noted. The mechanics in the first case can be applied for intrusion and retraction of maxillary anterior teeth when anchorage requirement is not critical. The mechanics described in the second case can be used for intrusion and retraction of maxillary anterior teeth in cases with a very high anchorage need and will be beneficial in patients with vertical growth pattern.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed249    
    Printed2    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded34    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal