Comparison of Two Different Mini-Implant Position in Maxillary Incisors Intrusion (Cone Beam Study) | ||||
| Al-Azhar Assiut Dental Journal | ||||
| Article 7, Volume 4, Issue 2, October 2021, Page 159-165 PDF (1.45 MB) | ||||
| Document Type: Original Article | ||||
| DOI: 10.21608/aadj.2021.208208 | ||||
 View on SCiNiTO | ||||
| Authors | ||||
| Mohamed A. Salem* 1; Esmail K. Hewy* 2 | ||||
| 1Department of orthodontics, Faculty of Dental Medicine, (Assuit, boys), Al-Azhar University, Egypt. | ||||
| 2Department of orthodontics, Faculty of Dental Medicine, (Assuit, boys), Al-Azhar University, Egypt | ||||
| Abstract | ||||
| Aim: To compare, through cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT), the root resorption of two different mini-implant-assisted modalities in intruding the maxillary incisors. Subjects and Methods: The present study composed of 26 patients (males, females) aged between 12-18 years who had deep bite and need maxillary incisors intrusion. They were randomly selected and divided into two group: anterior miniimplant group (AMG) and posterior mini-implant group (PMG). In the AMG, approximately 40 g of force was applied per side with elastic chains and in the PMG, with beta-titanium wires with modification of three pieces intrusive arch. This study was conducted on cone beam computed tomography scans taken before intrusion and after 18 weeks of intrusion. Results: The incisors showed a significant reduction in length, this amount was greater in AMG than PMG. Conclusion: Posterior miniimplants assisted maxillary incisors intrusion show less root resorption than anterior mini-implant assisted maxillary incisor intrusion | ||||
| Keywords | ||||
| Mini-implant; CBCT; maxillary incisors intrusion; root resorption; 3-D Measurement | ||||
|
Statistics Article View: 119 PDF Download: 143 |
||||
