Evaluation of Two Approaches of Micro-osteoperforations (MOPs) During Orthodontic Canine Retraction

June 14, 2022 updated by: Bassem Atef Hassan Ahmed, Al-Azhar University

Evaluation of Two Approaches of Micro-osteoperforations During Orthodontic:A Prospective Clinical Study

The aim of this clinical prospective study will be directed to evaluate two approaches of micro-osteoperforations (MOPs) during orthodontic canine retraction.

Study Overview

Detailed Description

The aim of the present clinical study was directed to evaluate the effectiveness of two approaches of micro-osteoperforations (MOPs) during orthodontic canine retraction.

This study was conducted on a total sample of 36 canines of 18 patients, 15-22 years old who required therapeutic extraction of maxillary 1st premolars and canine retraction. They were selected randomly from the Outpatient Clinic, Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dental Medicine (Boys), Al-Azhar University, Cairo, Egypt.

they were randamly dived into two groups:as follows: Group I: include 9 patients , MOPs were performed for one time only on one side before retraction.

Group II: include 9 patients , MOPs were performed on repeated basis on one side.

Both maxillary canines, in each patient, were randomly assigned to either an experimental side or the control side in a simple split-mouth design. In the experimental side, micro-osteoperforations was performed distal to the maxillary canine at equal distance between maxillary canine and 2nd premolar before starting retraction, while the canines in the contralateral control side were retracted without micro-osteoperforations.

Extraction was done at the start of the treatment, and before fitting of the orthodontic appliance. Then upper dental arches were leveled and aligned using conventional sequences of wires.

Three flapless micro-osteoperforations was performed by using orthodontic miniscrews distal to the maxillary canines in the experimental side before starting retraction. Each perforation was 1.6 mm in diameter and 3-4 mm depth into the bone. Canines were completely retracted on 0.016 × 0.022 ̋ stainless steel wires by using closed coil spring delivered 150 gm force.

Patients were followed up every 28 days for 4 months of canine retraction. Routine orthodontic records were obtained for each patient before treatment.

Additionally, a full skull CBCT images were taken before treatment and immediately after canine retraction.

The rate of canine retraction was assessed clinically; in addition, cone beam CT (CBCT) scans were used to assess the amount of canine retraction root length changes. Also anchorage loss of first permanent molars were assessed.

The treatment results were compared clinically and radiographically (CBCT).

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

18

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

      • Cairo, Egypt
        • Al Azhar University

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

11 years to 18 years (Child, Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:All patients should satisfy the following criteria:-

  1. Age range from 15-22 years.
  2. Malocclusion cases that require maxillary first premolars extractions followed by symmetrical canine retraction.
  3. All permanent teeth present, 3rd molars are excluded.
  4. Good oral and general health.
  5. No systemic disease/medication that could interfere with OTM.
  6. No previous orthodontic treatment.

Exclusion Criteria:

  1. Patient diagnosed to have an indication for non-extraction approach.
  2. Poor oral hygiene or periodontally compromised patient.
  3. Patient with craniofacial anomalies or previous history of trauma, bruxism or parafunctions.
  4. Previous orthodontic treatment.

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Other
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: None (Open Label)

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
No Intervention: control side
Conventional side Canine retraction was commenced without micro-osteoperforations.
Experimental: single Micro-osteoperforations side
Three flapless micro-osteoperforations (MOPs) was performed for one time only distal to the maxillary canine before starting retraction.
three flapless micro-osteoperforations was performed distal to the maxillary canine before starting retraction.
Other Names:
  • MOPs
Experimental: Multiple Micro-osteoperforations side
Three flapless micro-osteoperforations (MOPs) was performed on repeated basis distal to the maxillary canine evey 28 days before canine retraction.
three flapless micro-osteoperforations was performed distal to the maxillary canine before starting retraction.
Other Names:
  • MOPs

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Rate of canine retraction
Time Frame: change from start of canine retraction until 4 months .

clinically, patients were evaluated immediately before canine retraction and every 28days until for months.

It was based on measuring the distance between the contact points on the distal surface of the canines and the contact points on mesial surface of the second premolars.

change from start of canine retraction until 4 months .

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

November 11, 2020

Primary Completion (Actual)

February 14, 2022

Study Completion (Actual)

June 14, 2022

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

April 25, 2021

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

April 29, 2021

First Posted (Actual)

May 3, 2021

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

June 16, 2022

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

June 14, 2022

Last Verified

June 1, 2022

More Information

Terms related to this study

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Subscribe