Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 2, 2026
Author Spotlight: 3D Movement Assessment of Maxillary Posterior Teeth in Clear Aligner Treatment
Published on: February 23, 2024
Retrospective comparison of two different miniscrew-supported molar distalization methods applied in the buccal and
Yavuz Selim Aslan1, Mehmet Ali Yavan1, Nihal Hamamci1
1Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Adıyaman University, Adıyaman, Turkey.
Background:
To compare dentofacial effects of distalization with miniscrew-supported pendulum and infrazygomatic crest miniscrews.
Methods:
The study included 36 patients whose lateral cephalometric radiographs were obtained before (T0) and after (T1) distalization. Patients were divided into two groups according to the treatment methods: 1) distalization with miniscrew-supported pendulum (MSP) (n = 19; 14 girls and 5 boys; mean age 16.9 ± 1.46 years) and 2) distalization with infrazygomatic crest (IZC) miniscrews (n = 17; 8 girls and 9 boys; mean age 17.0 ± 1.68 years). Dental, skeletal and soft tissue measurements were performed on lateral cephalograms taken from individuals.
Results:
A significant molar distalization was achieved both in the MSP group (3.52 ± 0.76 mm at 8.71 ± 2.02 months) and the IZC group (3.5 ± 0.74 mm at 9.7 ± 2.5 months) (P < 0.001 for both). Premolar distalization was significantly lower in the MSP group (1.73 ± 1.09 mm) than in the IZC group (2.81 ± 0.79 mm) (P < 0.01). Significant molar tipping was observed in both groups (P < 0.001), while no significant difference was found between the groups (P > 0.05). Retrusion of maxillary incisors were significantly higher in the IZC group (2.75 mm) than in the MSP group (0.98 mm) (P < 0.01). A significant difference was found between the two groups with regard to the changes in overjet and overbite (P < 0.05).
Conclusions:
Both distalization methods were found to be effective in achieving a Class I molar relationship in patients with Class II malocclusion.
