ArticleProgress in orthodontics2020
A prospective clinical trial of the effects produced by the extrusion arch in the treatment of anterior open bite.
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 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, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of bonded lingual spurs with low trans palatal arch on developing anterior open bite (a randomized controlled trial).BMC oral health · 2026Trial
- Dentoalveolar effects of skeletally anchored extrusion arch in anterior open bite patients: A prospective clinical trial.Dental press journal of orthodontics · 2024Trial
- Stability of anterior open bite cases treated with upper and lower extrusion arches in adults: a follow-up study.The Angle orthodontist · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo evaluate the maxillary dentition effects of the extrusion arch for anterior open bite (AOB) correction in mixed dentition patients. MATERIALS AND
methodsFourteen subjects with an initial mean age of 9.17 ± 1.03 years presenting with dentoalveolar AOB (mean - 1.28 ± 1.46 mm) and normal facial pattern (FMA = 25.76°) were treated with an extrusion arch. The mean treatment period was 7.79 ± 2.58 months. Lateral cephalograms and dental models were taken before (T0) and after the correction of AOB (T1). Data were analyzed using paired t test to evaluate differences between T0 and T1. For all tests, a significance level of P < .05 was used.
resultsAll patients achieved positive overbite at T1, with a mean increase of 3.07 mm. The maxillary incisors extruded 1.94 mm. Retroclination of the maxillary incisors (- 6.15°) and an increase in the interincisal angle (5.57°) were observed. There was a significant decrease in the distance between the incisal edge of the maxillary incisors and the molars (- 2.21 mm). There was significant mesial tipping of the maxillary molar (- 11.49°). Significant reductions of overjet (- 1.65 mm), arch perimeter (- 3.02 mm), and arch length (- 2.23 mm) were noted. The transverse maxillary intermolar distance did not change significantly.
conclusionsThe use of a maxillary extrusion arch was effective in the treatment of AOB. Overbite increased due to incisor extrusion, as well as retroinclination and overjet reduction. However, side effects, such as mesial molar tipping and decreases in arch perimeter and length might occur.
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.