ArticleCureus2025
Evaluation and Comparison of Rate of Canine Retraction Between Titanium Dioxide Nanocoated Stainless Steel Archwire Segments and Uncoated Stainless Steel Archwire Segments: An In Vivo Split Mouth Study.
Article in Cureus, 2025. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives Our objectives were to compare titanium dioxide (TiO₂) nanocoated stainless steel archwire segments with uncoated stainless steel archwire segments during individual canine retraction. Materials and methods A split-mouth study was carried out in vivo on 15 patients who needed bilateral maxillary canine retraction. One side of each patient's stainless steel archwire was coated with TiO₂ nanoparticles, while the other side was left untreated. Using nickel-titanium closed coil springs and 150 g of force, canine retraction was performed. Digital vernier calipers were used to take measurements at four-week intervals for 16 weeks. Results The rate of canine retraction was statistically significantly higher in the TiO₂ nanocoated archwire segments than in the untreated segments (p < 0.05). At the first, third, and fourth months in particular, significant differences were found (T1: p=0.021*, T3: p=0.021*, and T4: p=0.023*). There were no changes at baseline (T0: p=1.000) or during the second month (T2: p=0.126), suggesting that the beneficial effect of nanocoating became more pronounced as treatment progressed. Overall, the difference in total space closure was modest but statistically significant, with steady advancement of space closure over time. Conclusion TiO₂ nanocoating may enhance the efficiency of orthodontic tooth movement by reducing friction. In the present study, the nanocoated segment showed faster tooth movement compared to the uncoated segment.
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.