ArticleKorean journal of orthodontics2016
Three-dimensional evaluation of tooth movement in Class II malocclusions treated without extraction by orthodontic mini-implant anchorage.
Article in Korean journal of orthodontics, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- The effectiveness of the total-maxillary-arch-distalization approach in treating class II division 1 malocclusion: A systematic review.Clinical oral investigations · 2024Pooled it
- Effectiveness of miniscrew-supported maxillary molar distalization according to temporary anchorage device features and appliance design: systematic review and meta-analysis.The Angle orthodontist · 2024Pooled it
- Digital Analysis of Occlusal Contacts in Angle Class II and Class III Malocclusion.Acta stomatologica Croatica · 2026Article
- Dental arch form in a sample of Iraqi adults with sickle cell anemia using 3D scanning technique: A cross-sectional study.Journal of orthodontic science · 2023Article
- Two-dimensional radiographs versus cone-beam computed tomography in planning mini-implant placement: A systematic review.Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry · 2022Review
- Comparison of 3-dimensional postoperative dental movement in Class III surgical correction with and without presurgical orthodontic treatment.Biomedical journal · 2021Article
- Sagittal, rotational and transverse changes with three intraoral distalization force systems: Jones jig, distal jet and first class.Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry · 2021Article
- Three-dimensional analysis of tooth movement in Class II malocclusion treatment using arch wire with continuous tip-back bends and intermaxillary elastics.Korean journal of orthodontics · 2019Article
- Clinical application of an intraoral scanner for serial evaluation of orthodontic tooth movement: A preliminary study.Korean journal of orthodontics · 2018Article
- Attitudes of orthodontists and laypersons towards tooth extractions and additional anchorage devices.Progress in orthodontics · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of this study was to analyze tooth movement and arch width changes in maxillary dentition following nonextraction treatment with orthodontic mini-implant (OMI) anchorage in Class II division 1 malocclusions.
methodsSeventeen adult patients diagnosed with Angle's Class II division 1 malocclusion were treated by nonextraction with OMIs as anchorage for distalization of whole maxillary dentition. Three-dimensional virtual maxillary models were superimposed with the best-fit method at the pretreatment and post-treatment stages. Linear, angular, and arch width variables were measured using Rapidform 2006 software, and analyzed by the paired t-test.
resultsAll maxillary teeth showed statistically significant movement posteriorly (p < 0.05). There were no significant changes in the vertical position of the maxillary teeth, except that the second molars were extruded (0.86 mm, p < 0.01). The maxillary first and second molars were rotated distal-in (4.5°, p < 0.001; 3.0°, p < 0.05, respectively). The intersecond molar width increased slightly (0.1 mm, p > 0.05) and the intercanine, interfirst premolar, intersecond premolar, and interfirst molar widths increased significantly (2.2 mm, p < 0.01; 2.2 mm, p < 0.05; 1.9 mm, p < 0.01; 2.0 mm, p < 0.01; respectively).
conclusionsNonextraction treatment with OMI anchorage for Class II division 1 malocclusions could retract the whole maxillary dentition to achieve a Class I canine and molar relationship without a change in the vertical position of the teeth; however, the second molars were significantly extruded. Simultaneously, the maxillary arch was shown to be expanded with distal-in rotation of the molars.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.