ArticleTurkish journal of orthodontics2024
Timing of Therapeutic Extractions Can Affect En Masse Anterior Retraction: A Split Mouth Randomized Clinical Trial.
Article in Turkish journal of orthodontics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To investigate the effect of deferred timing of therapeutic extraction on the rate of space closure during en masse anterior retraction. Methods: Twenty-six patients (aged 16-24 years) with bimaxillary protrusion, crowding <3 mm, requiring bilateral extraction of four first premolars were recruited. Permuted block randomization was done. Allocations were concealed in opaque envelopes which were numbered and sealed. Each patient's right and left quadrant was randomly assigned for premolar extraction. The extraction of the contralateral side was deferred until the commencement of retraction. The primary outcome was the rate of space closure, and the secondary outcomes were anchorage loss and canine rotation. Blinding was applied only during the outcome assessment. The independent t-test and Intraclass correlation tests were used for statistical evaluation. Results: Twenty-four patients completed the study. The mean rate of space closure over a period of 4 months was found to be significantly higher for the recently extracted site (0.818±0.208) when compared with healed site(0.426±0.184)(p<0.001). The tipping of the canine was also significantly higher for the former (6.042°±1.398°) than the latter (5.125°±1.035°) (p<0.05). However, the amounts of anchorage loss and canine rotation were insignificant. No adverse effects were noted. Conclusion: The rate of space closure at the recent extraction site was faster than that at the healed site. There was no significant difference in the mesial movement of anchorage molars or rotation of canines into the extraction site. The tipping of canines was significantly greater in the recent extracted quadrant. The results of this trial indicate a clinical recommendation to initiate orthodontic retraction immediately following therapeutic extractions and offer a practical, non-invasive, safe procedure for increasing the rate of tooth movement.
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.