Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32893322›Full record

ArticleProgress in orthodontics2020

One versus two anterior miniscrews for correcting upper incisor overbite and angulation: a retrospective comparative study.

Arturo Vela-Hernández, Laura Gutiérrez-Zubeldia, Rocío López-García, Verónica García-Sanz, Vanessa Paredes-Gallardo, José Luis Gandía-Franco, Felicidad Lasagabaster-Latorre

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Progress in orthodontics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.5field-weighted citation impact, top 22% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. [Periodontic-orthodontic-orthognathic combined treatment of adult Class Ⅱ skeletal malocclusion with idiopathic gingival fibromatosis: a case report].Hua xi kou qiang yi xue za zhi = Huaxi kouqiang yixue zazhi = West China journal of stomatology · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Arturo Vela-HernándezOrthodontics Teaching Unit, Department of Stomatology, University of Valencia, Gascó Oliag 1, 46010, Valencia, Spain.
Laura Gutiérrez-ZubeldiaIn private practice, Vitoria, Spain.
Rocío López-GarcíaIn private practice, Vitoria, Spain.
Verónica García-SanzOrthodontics Teaching Unit, Department of Stomatology, University of Valencia, Gascó Oliag 1, 46010, Valencia, Spain.
Vanessa Paredes-GallardoOrthodontics Teaching Unit, Department of Stomatology, University of Valencia, Gascó Oliag 1, 46010, Valencia, Spain. Vanessa.paredes@uv.es.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4137-5808
José Luis Gandía-FrancoOrthodontics Teaching Unit, Department of Stomatology, University of Valencia, Gascó Oliag 1, 46010, Valencia, Spain.
Felicidad Lasagabaster-LatorreIn private practice, Vitoria, Spain.
Universitat de València · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMiniscrews are effective devices for performing upper incisor intrusion. Different mechanics can be applied depending on the treatment objectives. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of one or two anterior miniscrews for upper incisor correction in cases of overbite and angulation in adult patients.

methodsForty-four adults with deep overbite were divided into two groups: group 1 was treated with one miniscrew between upper central incisors and group 2 with two miniscrews between upper lateral incisors and canines. Incisor intrusion and length were measured from lateral cephalograms before treatment, after treatment and at least 12 months into retention (T0, T1 and T2). Forces were applied (90 g) from the miniscrews to the archwire using elastomeric chains. ANOVA analysis was used to determine whether differences between evaluation times were statistically significant.

resultsMean root resorption was 2.15 ± 0.85 mm, which ceased after active treatment. Overbite mean correction was - 3.23 ± 1.73 mm with no statistically significant relapse. Overbite correction and incisor intrusion were significantly greater in group 2 (- 3.80 ± 1.43 versus - 2.75 ± 1.63 for OB and 8.19 ± 3.66 versus 5.69 ± 2.66 for intrusion). Resorption and overbite correction were positively related. No counterclockwise rotation of the mandibular plane was observed.

conclusionsOverbite correction can be performed by means of upper incisor intrusion without rotation of the mandibular plane. Correction of upper incisor intrusion and overbite is greater in patients treated with two miniscrews. The increase in upper incisor buccal angulation is greater with one miniscrew. Root resorption is positively related to the extent of intrusion. Stability is satisfactory regardless of whether one or two miniscrews are used.

Indexed as

Orthodontic Anchorage ProceduresOverbiteAdultCephalometryHumansIncisorMaxillaRetrospective StudiesTooth Movement TechniquesIncisor intrusionMiniscrewsOverbiteResorption

Identifiers

PMID32893322
PMCPMC7475152
OpenAlexW3083753871

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.