Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36529797›Full record

Trial reportProgress in orthodontics2022

Three-dimensional evaluation of maxillary tooth movement in extraction patients with three different miniscrew anchorage systems: a randomized controlled trial.

Liwen Zhang, Runzhi Guo, Baohua Xu, Yue Wang, Weiran Li

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Progress in orthodontics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

5 authors.

Liwen Zhang *Department of Dental Medical Center, China-Japan Friendship Hospital, Beijing, People's Republic of China.
Runzhi Guo *Department of Orthodontics, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology, 22 Zhongguancun Avenue South, Haidian District, Beijing, 100081, People's Republic of China.
Baohua XuDepartment of Dental Medical Center, China-Japan Friendship Hospital, Beijing, People's Republic of China.
Yue WangDepartment of Dental Medical Center, China-Japan Friendship Hospital, Beijing, People's Republic of China.
Weiran LiDepartment of Orthodontics, Peking University School and Hospital of Stomatology, 22 Zhongguancun Avenue South, Haidian District, Beijing, 100081, People's Republic of China. weiranli@bjmu.edu.cn.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9895-1143

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo compare the three-dimensional (3-D) movement of maxillary teeth in response to three common miniscrew anchorage systems in extraction patients with maxillary dentoalveolar protrusion. MATERIALS AND

methodsThe study employed a randomized controlled single-blinded design with three arms. Thirty extraction patients who required maximum anchorage to retract maxillary anterior teeth were included and randomly allocated into three treatment groups: space closure with direct miniscrew anchorage and low crimpable hooks (DL group), indirect miniscrew anchorage and low crimpable hooks (IL group), and direct miniscrew anchorage and high crimpable hooks (DH group). Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) images of all included patients were obtained immediately before (T0) and after (T1) space closure. The outcomes were 3-D positional changes of maxillary central incisor, lateral incisor, canine, second premolar, and first molar. The repeated measures analysis of variance with post hoc LSD test was used to evaluate differences among groups.

resultsA significant intrusion (- 1.34 mm; 95% CI, - 1.60 mm, 1.08 mm) and buccal (- 6.92°; 95% CI, - 8.67°, - 5.13°) and distal (4.90°; 95% CI, 3.75°, 6.04°) inclination of the maxillary first molars were observed in the DL group, compared to the other two groups. The mesial movement (- 0.40 mm; 95% CI, - 0.83 mm, - 0.03 mm) of the maxillary first molars was found in the IL group, while the DL (0.44 mm; 95% CI, 0.15 mm, 0.73 mm) and IL (0.62 mm; 95% CI, 0.28 mm, 0.96 mm) groups exhibited distal movement. In the DH group, the lingual inclination changes of maxillary central incisor (5.04°; 95% CI, 2.82°, 7.26°) were significantly lower, which is indicative of good lingual root torque control of the maxillary anterior teeth.

conclusionThree miniscrew anchorage systems produced significantly different 3-D maxillary tooth movement. The maxillary first molars were significantly buccally and distally inclined and intruded in patients using direct miniscrew anchorages with low crimpable hooks. Direct miniscrew anchorages with high crimpable hooks could help to achieve better lingual root torque control of the maxillary incisors. Trial registration The trial was registered at www.chictr.org.cn (ChiCTR1900026960). Registered 27 October 2019.

Indexed as

Orthodontic Anchorage ProceduresHumansIncisorMaxillaMolarTooth Movement TechniquesCone beam computed tomographyMaxillary tooth movementMiniscrewRandomized controlled trial

Identifiers

PMID36529797
PMCPMC9760583

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.