ReviewCureus2024
How Effective Are the Nance Appliance and Transpalatal Arch at Reinforcing Anchorage in Extraction Cases?
Review in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07063186 (Comparing Ligation Methods During Canine Retraction Stage Using Conventional Brackets), which is not on this map. Cited by 5 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.
Comparing Ligation Methods During Canine Retraction Stage Using Conventional Brackets: A Randomized Controlled Trial
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Retrospective Assessment of Palatal Biofilm and Mucosal Inflammation Under Orthodontic Appliances in Young Adults (2022-2025): A Single-Center Cohort with Microbiologic Sub-Sampling.Dentistry journal · 2025Article
- Bacterial Colonization of Orthodontic Devices (Molar Bands, Nance Buttons, and Acrylic Plates) and Its Impact on the Marginal Periodontium and Palatal Fibromucosa in Teenagers: A Cross-Sectional Clinical-Microbiological Study.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2025Article
- Review
- Maxillary incisors and molars with conventional and skeletal anchorage device: A randomized controlled trial.Bioinformation · 2025Article
- Effectiveness of Transpalatal Arch (TPA) in Molar Movement: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.Medical journal of the Islamic Republic of Iran · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis narrative review aimed to evaluate, based on current evidence, whether the transpalatal arch (TPA) and Nance appliance can effectively reinforce anchorage during fixed orthodontic treatment while also offering a comprehensive and in-depth overview of the existing literature on this subject. MATERIALS AND
methodsA thorough literature search was performed across multiple electronic databases to identify peer-reviewed articles relevant to the review.
resultsEvidence suggests that the Nance appliance does not provide absolute anchorage. Additionally, patients experienced discomfort and inflammation of the palatal tissues. The transpalatal arch is also insufficient for maximum anteroposterior anchorage, and existing studies on its effectiveness in vertical anchorage control are inconsistent with conflicting data.
conclusionsFor patients with critical anchorage demand, mini-screws may be the method of choice, either solely or in combination with Nance or transpalatal arch, though they carry a risk of failure.
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.