ArticleBMC oral health2025
Retrospective analysis of mini-implant assisted micro-osteoperforation for accelerating canine movement in adult orthodontics.
Article in BMC oral health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Dental Patients' Loyalty and Experiences with Staff/Systems in a Tertiary Hospital.International dental journal · 2026Article
- A scientometric study on research trends and characteristics of randomized controlled trials in orthodontics.Journal of dental sciences · 2026Article
- Clinical efficacy of micro-implant anchorage in orthodontic treatment.American journal of translational research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTraditional orthodontic treatment methods are associated with long treatment durations and patient discomfort. The mini-implant assisted micro-osteoperforation (MOP) has shown great potential in clinical practice, but systematic research on this technology remains limited.
methodsA retrospective analysis of 106 adult patients requiring extraction of both maxillary first premolars were conducted, with patients randomly grouped: experimental group (EG, mini-implant assisted MOP) and control group (CG, conventional orthodontic treatment), with 53 cases in each. Tooth movement distances, root resorption amounts, craniofacial relationship measurement angles (SNA, SNB, ANB), maxillary anterior tooth positions and angles (U1-X, U1-Y, U1-SN), maxillary first molar positions and angles (U6-X, U6-Y, U6-X), and soft tissue angles (NLA) were compared.
resultsThe distance of canine movement in the EG was (1.89±0.28) mm after 1 month of force application, and (3.67±0.54) mm after 2 months of force application. In the CG, the distance of canine movement was (0.96±0.32) mm after 1 month of force application, and (1.88±0.34) mm after 2 months of force application. The EG suggested visibly greater canine movement distances one month and two months after force application as against the CG, with visibly lower U1-X and U1-Y angles, and visibly lower U6-X and U6-Y angles (P<0.05). No visible distinctions were noted in soft tissue angles between the EG and the CG one month and two months after force application (P>0.05).
conclusionCompared to existing orthodontic treatment methods, implant-supported mini-screw perforation surgery, as an auxiliary approach to accelerate orthodontic treatment, can significantly accelerate tooth movement without significantly increasing the risk of root resorption, and has minimal impact on craniofacial relationships and soft tissues. This finding provides a new and effective adjunct for orthodontic treatment, with the potential to shorten treatment duration and improve the patient experience in clinical practice, making it of significant importance for advancing the development of orthodontic techniques.
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.