Trial reportHead & face medicine2021
Three dimensional movement analysis of maxillary impacted canine using TADs: a pilot study.
Trial report in Head & face medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01717417 (Three Dimensional Movement Analysis of Maxillary Impacted Canine Using TADs), which is not on this 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.
Three Dimensional Movement Analysis of Maxillary Impacted Canine Using TADs: a Randomized Clinical Trial
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Three-Dimensional Comparison of CBCT and Intraoral Scans for Assessing Orthodontic Traction of Impacted Canines with Clear Aligners.Dentistry journal · 2025Article
- Aligners as a Therapeutic Approach in Impacted Canine Treatment: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Impacted Canine Management Using Aligners Supported by Orthodontic Temporary Anchorage Devices.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of the present study was to compare two different anchorage systems efficiency to disinclude impacted maxillary canines using as evaluation tool superimposed Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCTs).
methodsThe study has been conducted with two parallel groups with an allocation ratio of 1:1. Group test received treatment using as anchorage a miniscrew, control group was treated using an anchorage unit a trans palatal arch (TPA). Both groups received a calibrated traction force of 50 g. CBCT before treatment and 3 months after traction were superimposed and canine tip and root movement were evaluated in mm/month ratio.
resultsNo differences were observed between groups for apex displacement, tip displacement and observation timespan. Twenty-two patients (12 female, 10 male, mean age:13.4 years) undergoing orthodontic treatment for impacted maxillary canines were recruited for this study. No differences were observed between groups for apex displacement, tip displacement and observation timespan.
conclusionsThe present pilot study provided no evidence that indirect anchorage on miniscrews could make canine disimpaction faster than anchorage on a TPA. An apex root movement of 0.4-0.8 mm per month was found, while average canine tip movement ranged between 1.08 mm and 1.96 mm per month. No miniscrews failures were observed.
trial registrationThe study reports the preliminary results of the randomized clinical trial registered at www.register.clinicaltrials.gov (registration number: NCT01717417 ).
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.