Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 18, 2025
11:51
An Improved Mechanical Testing Method to Assess Bone-implant Anchorage
Published on: February 10, 2014
15.5K
Skeletal Anchorage Augmentation in Extraction/Nonextraction Orthodontic Treatment: A Randomized Clinical Study
Niti Dharmendra Shah1, Santosh Kumar Goje2
1KM Shah Dental College & Hospital, Sumandeep Vidyapeeth, Vadodara, Gujarat, India, Phone: +91 9978601796,
The Journal of Contemporary Dental Practice
|August 25, 2023
Summary
This study compared first premolar extraction versus nonextraction distalization for bimaxillary proclination using skeletal anchorage. Incisor retraction was faster with extraction, but nonextraction offered an alternative to avoid premolar removal.
Area of Science:
- Orthodontics
- Dental Biomaterials
- Craniofacial Surgery
Background:
- Bimaxillary proclination often requires orthodontic treatment.
- Skeletal anchorage systems offer new possibilities for tooth movement.
- First premolar extraction is a common approach, but alternatives are sought.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare skeletal, dental, and soft tissue changes.
- Evaluate therapeutic first premolar extraction versus nonextraction distalization.
- Utilize skeletal anchorage in bimaxillary proclination.
Main Methods:
- Randomized clinical trial with 40 patients.
- Two groups: extraction and nonextraction.
- Skeletal anchorage (mini-implants, screws) used for retraction and distalization.
Main Results:
- Significant dental and soft tissue changes in both groups.
- Group B (nonextraction) showed significant skeletal changes.
- Incisor retraction was faster than distalization.
Conclusions:
- Nonextraction distalization is a viable alternative to premolar extraction.
- Skeletal anchorage facilitates efficient tooth movement.
- Treatment can improve facial profile and avoid premolar extraction.
Keywords:
Bimaxillary protrusionBuccal shelf screwsDistalizationInfra-zygomatic crest screwsMini implantsPremolar extraction Retraction.
