Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 17, 2025
Author Spotlight: 3D Movement Assessment of Maxillary Posterior Teeth in Clear Aligner Treatment
Published on: February 23, 2024
Skeletal and dentoalveolar changes after total maxillary arch distalization using the casted palatal plate vs. buccal
Tuqa Rashad Raghis1, Tareq Mosleh Alfrih Alsulaiman1, Ghiath Mahmoud1
1Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Damascus University, Damascus, Syria.
Objectives:
To evaluate treatment changes after total maxillary arch distalization using the casted palatal plate compared with buccal miniscrews.
Material And Methods:
This was a randomized, parallel, two-arm, single center trial. Participants were young adults with class II dental relationships and normal or horizontal growth patterns. The patients were treated with total distalization of the maxillary arch and were randomly allocated, according to the anchorage devices, between the plate group and the minivis group. The primary outcomes were sagittal, vertical and angular changes of molars and incisors, while the secondary outcomes were skeletal and soft tissue changes. Outcomes were evaluated on lateral cephalograms and blinding of outcome assessment was implemented. A multivariate analysis of Variance (MANOVA) tests were used and Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons with P<0.001.
Results:
Forty patients (33 females and 7 males; mean age 20±3.1 years) where enrolled. A significant distalization of U6 was observed in both groups (4.33mm in the plate group and 1.88mm in the miniscrews group). It was combined with significant intrusion and non-significant distal tipping of the U6 in the plate group (1.85mm and 3.10°, respectively), while intrusion and distal tipping were non-significant in the miniscrew group (0.8mm and 2°, respectively). Both groups showed significant retraction and palatal inclination without vertical changes of U1. Only the plate group produced significant reduction of ANB and Wits. Upper and lower lips were retracted and the nasolabial angle increased significantly in both groups. There was no significant main effect of the appliance type on the comparison of treatment effects between the two groups (P=0.623). However, univariate comparisons showed that the plaque group showed greater distalization of the U6 (P<0.001).
Conclusions:
Both the casted palatal plate and buccal miniscrews can be viable devices for total distalization of the maxillary arch in the treatment of class II patients. The casted plate may be considered when more extensive distalization is required.
