Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41027613›Full record

ArticleThe Angle orthodontist2026

The impact of orthodontic traction on outcomes in impacted canine management: a quantitative analysis.

Hilal Tarkan, Oruç Ömer Gürbüz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Angle orthodontist, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

2 authors.

Hilal Tarkan
Oruç Ömer Gürbüz

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the effects of orthodontic traction of impacted maxillary canines on treatment duration, alveolar bone levels, white spot lesions (WSLs), root resorption, and the need for auxiliary appliances. Materials and Methods: In this retrospective study, 116 patients were divided into two groups: 58 with unilaterally impacted maxillary canines and 58 controls without impaction. All patients received nonextraction treatment using labial fixed appliances. Pretreatment and posttreatment panoramic radiographs, intraoral photographs, and intraoral scans were analyzed. The collected data were used to compare the groups across five clinical parameters. Statistical analyses included the Mann-Whitney U-test, Wilcoxon signed-rank test, χ2 test, and Cochran's Q test, with significance set at P < .05. Results: The impaction group had significantly longer treatment duration (mean = 2.64 ± 0.99 years) than controls (mean = 1.85 ± 0.60 years). Alveolar bone loss was significantly greater in teeth adjacent to the impacted canine and between the impacted and nonimpacted sides within the impaction group (P < .05). WSL incidence was higher in the impaction group, especially in posterior teeth (P = .0034). Root resorption patterns differed by region: maxillary incisors were more affected in the impaction group, whereas mandibular posterior teeth showed more resorption in controls. The use of auxiliary appliances was significantly greater in the impaction group. Conclusions: Impacted canine treatment is associated with increased treatment time, greater alveolar bone loss, higher risk of WSLs, and distinct root resorption patterns. These findings highlight the importance of individualized treatment planning, careful biomechanical control, and preventive strategies in managing impacted canines.

Indexed as

CuspidOrthodontic ExtrusionTooth, ImpactedAdolescentAlveolar Bone LossChildFemaleHumansMaleMaxillaOrthodontic Appliances, FixedRadiography, PanoramicRetrospective StudiesRoot ResorptionTreatment OutcomeAlveolar bone lossImpacted canineOrthodontic tractionRoot resorptionWhite spot lesions

Identifiers

PMID41027613
PMCPMC12962264

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.