ArticleKorean journal of orthodontics2019
Effects of orthodontic force on root surface damage caused by contact with temporary anchorage devices and on the repair process.
Article in Korean journal of orthodontics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Tooth Complications after Orthodontic Miniscrews Insertion.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Review
- Does mini-implant-supported rapid maxillary expansion cause less root resorption than traditional approaches? A micro-computed tomography study.Korean journal of orthodontics · 2021Article
- Does the rhythm and appliance type of rapid maxillary expansion have an effect on root resorption?The Angle orthodontist · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to evaluate the effects of force loading on root damage caused by contact with temporary anchorage devices (TADs) during orthodontic treatment and to examine the repair process 4, 8, and 12 weeks after TAD contact by micro-computed tomography (CT).
methodsWe enrolled 42 volunteers who required bilateral upper first premolar extractions. The experimental study design was as follows. For both first premolars, cantilever springs were placed, and then TADs were immediately inserted between the premolars of all volunteers. According to the removal order of the appliances, the participants were divided into the TAD group (Group T: n = 21, only TAD removal) and the spring group (Group S: n = 21, only spring removal). A split-mouth design was adopted in both groups as follows. For each volunteer, the left premolars were extracted 4, 8, or 12 weeks after TAD-root contact. The right premolars were extracted immediately after contact in both groups (Groups T-C and S-C) and used as positive controls. Resorption volumes and numbers of craters were determined by micro-CT.
resultsThe numbers of resorption craters were higher in Group T than in Group S at 8 and 12 weeks (
conclusionsRoot injury was not completely repaired 12 weeks after root-TAD contact, even when the TADs were removed in cases of continuous force application.
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.