Author:
Trpevska Vesna,Tanatarec Ivan,Srbinoska Daniela,Mijoska Aneta
Abstract
Correct positioning of the canines after their retraction is of great importance for the function, stability and esthetics. Aim: Two case reports were presented to compare the efficiency of two techniques for canine retraction, segmented mechanics using 0.017 x 0.025 TMA T-loop vs sliding straight-wire mechanics usingelastomeric chains. Material and methods: The first case describes orthodontic treatment with 0.017 x 0.025 TMA T-loop whereas the second case describes a 9 mm canine retraction using elastomeric chains. Results: Depending on the type of malocclusion both techniques for canine retraction can be used. Post treatment results showed canine retraction with good anchorage control and no mesial movement of the molars.Conclusion: Both techniques provide an optimum rate of tooth movement and none of the methods can be considered superior in terms of tooth movement or side effects, including rotation, tipping, root resorption, anchorage loss, as well as associated pain.
Publisher
Scientific Foundation SPIROSKI
Reference18 articles.
1. Bass TB. Observation on the misplaced upper canine tooth. Den Pract 1967; 18:25-37.
2. Ma W, Preston B, Asai Y, Guan H, Guan G. Perceptions of dental professionals and laypeople to altered maxillary incisor crowding. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2014; 146:579-86.
3. Bernabe E, Kresevic V, Cabrejos S. Dental esthetic self-perception in young adults with and without previous orthodontic treatment. Angle Orthod 2006; 76:412-6.
4. Chaushu S, Bongart M, Aksoy A, Ben-Bassat Y, Becker A. Buccalectopia of maxillary canines with no crowding. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2009; 136:218-23.
5. Dermaut LR, De Pauw G. Biomechanical aspects of Class II mechanics with special emphasis in deep bite correction as part of the treatment goal. In: Nanda R ed. Biomechanics in clinical Orthodontics 1997 Philadelphia, PaW.B. Saunders Co:86-98.