ArticleInternational journal of dentistry2026
Three-Dimensional Analysis of Maxillary Incisor Root Resorption Associated With Three Distinct Anterior Retraction Protocols: A Retrospective Study.
Article in International journal of dentistry, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparison of external apical root resorption in maxillary anterior teeth following en-masse versus two-step retraction: a 3D volumetric CBCT-based randomized controlled trial.Clinical oral investigations · 2026Trial
- Three-Dimensional Analysis of Maxillary Incisor Root Resorption Associated With Three Distinct Anterior Retraction Protocols: A Retrospective Study.International journal of dentistry · 2026Article
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: Our objective was to compare differences in the amount of apical external resorption of maxillary incisor roots before and after orthodontic treatment with an invisible aligner, fixed orthodontic without microimplant support, and fixed orthodontic with microimplant support. Methods: This study collected the clinical data of patients with Class II malocclusion who underwent orthodontic treatment with the treatment plan of extracting four premolars between 2018 and 2022. There were 10 patients treated with an invisible aligner, 10 treated with a fixed orthodontic without microimplant support group, and 10 treated with a fixed orthodontic with microimplant support. Changes in root volume and the length of the maxillary incisors in the three groups before and after the treatments were measured using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) and 3D-Slicer software. Results: The Conclusion: Fixed orthodontic treatment with microimplant support had a greater effect on the root volume of the maxillary incisors than invisible orthodontic treatment and conventional fixed orthodontic treatment. The degree of external apical root resorption (EARR) was positively correlated with the patient's age. Therefore, in clinical practice, for older patients or those requiring the use of mini-implants for retraction, special attention should be paid to the root resorption.
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.