Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34009424›Full record

ArticleJournal of orofacial orthopedics = Fortschritte der Kieferorthopadie : Organ/official journal Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Kieferorthopadie2022

Three-dimensional imaging and molecular analysis of the effects of photobiomodulation and mechanical vibration on orthodontic retention treatment in rats : Effects of photobiomodulation and mechanical vibration on orthodontic retention treatment.

Taner Öztürk, Nisa Gül Amuk

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of orofacial orthopedics = Fortschritte der Kieferorthopadie : Organ/official journal Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Kieferorthopadie, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 31% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Taner ÖztürkDepartment of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Erciyes University, 38039, Kayseri, Turkey. tanertr35@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1670-286X
Nisa Gül AmukDepartment of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Erciyes University, 38039, Kayseri, Turkey.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3752-7100
Erciyes University · TR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeWe aimed to evaluate and compare effects of photobiomodulation (PBM) and low-magnitude high-frequency mechanical vibration (HFMV) on orthodontic retention.

methodsSixty-four female Wistar albino rats were divided into 9 groups (2 negative and positive controls each, 3 PBM and 2 HFMV groups) and studied for 25 days. In the experimental groups, closed nickel-titanium closed coil springs with a 50 cN force were placed for 10 days between the maxillary incisor and molar. PBM and HFMV were applied daily over long- (15 days) and short-term (7 days) retention periods. The PBM groups received PBM with a single wavelength (650 nm) or higher wavelengths (532, 650, 940 nm) for 9 min per day. HFMV groups received HFMV of 10, 20, and 30 Hz for 10 min per day. Right and left maxilla were assessed using micro-computed tomography imaging and real-time polymerase chain reaction. The amount of tooth movement during the retention period, expression levels of cyclooxygenase‑2 (COX-2), osteoprotegerin (OPG), and receptor activator of nuclear factor-kappa B ligand (RANKL) mRNA gene expression levels, OPG/RANKL ratios, alveolar bone trabecular thickness (Tb.Th), trabecular number (Tb.N), and structure model index were analyzed. Kruskal-Wallis and Mann-Whitney U tests were used for multiple comparisons of the nonparametric distributed data and binary comparisons, respectively.

resultsWhen using the long-term retention protocol, PBM and HFMV treatment increased Tb.N (p < 0.05) and decreased COX‑2 mRNA gene expression levels (p < 0.05) and Tb.Th (p < 0.05) compared to controls. For short-term retention, PBM and HFMV decreased the amount of relapse tooth movement compared to controls. In addition, Tb.Th (p < 0.05) and the mRNA gene expression levels of COX‑2 and RANKL (p < 0.05) were decreased.

conclusionPBM and HFMV might be able to support retention after orthodontic tooth movement by reducing bone resorption and increasing bone quality.

Indexed as

OsteoprotegerinRANK LigandAnimalsCyclooxygenase 2FemaleImaging, Three-DimensionalNickelOrthodontic RetainersOsteoclastsRatsRats, WistarRNA, MessengerTitaniumTooth Movement TechniquesVibrationX-Ray MicrotomographyCyclooxygenase 2NickelOsteoprotegerinRANK LigandRNA, MessengerTitaniumAnimal modelMicro-computed tomography, X‑rayPolymerase chain reactionRelapseRetention after orthodontic treatment

Identifiers

PMID34009424
OpenAlexW3160701826

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.