ArticleDental press journal of orthodontics2021
Effect of second molar eruption on efficiency of maxillary first molar distalization using Carriere distalizer appliance.
Article in Dental press journal of orthodontics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Molar distalization in orthodontics: a bibliometric analysis.Clinical oral investigations · 2024Review
- A New Digital Method to Quantify the Effects Produced by Carriere Motion Appliance.Journal of personalized medicine · 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
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionMaxillary molar distalization is a common approach for correcting dental Class II malocclusions.
objectiveThis study aimed at comparing the outcomes of maxillary first molar distalization using the Carriere appliance before and after second molar eruption.
methodsTwo groups of patients with dental Class II malocclusions were treated with Carriere distalizer appliance with heavy rectangular mandibular wire and lingual arch for anchorage. Patients of the first group presented unerupted maxillary second molars during the distalization period. In the second group, maxillary second molars were in occlusion on treatment onset. Cone beam computed tomography images were taken at the beginning of treatment and after finishing molar distalization, to compare both groups regarding first molar distalization, intrusion, mesiodistal tipping, buccolingual torquing and rotation, anchorage loss and skeletal changes. Also, the treatment durations were compared.
resultsThe mean first molar distalization period in the first group (19.2 ± 1.6 weeks) was significantly smaller than the second group (23.3 ± 2.3 weeks). The amount of maxillary first molar distalization was significantly greater, while the amount of rotation was significantly smaller in the first group. No statistically significant differences in the amounts of maxillary first molar intrusion, mesiodistal tipping and buccolingual torquing between both groups was found. Mandibular incisor labiolingual torquing and mandibular first molar mesialization and mesiodistal tipping were significantly greater in the second group.
conclusionsMaxillary first molar distalization before maxillary second molar eruption is more efficient, with less anchorage loss than after second molar eruption.
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.