MedPath

A Comparison of Two Protocol for Maxillary Molar Intrusion Buccal Miniscrew and TPA Versus Vertical Holding Appliance

Not Applicable
Active, not recruiting
Conditions
ANB , SNA, SNB
Dental Intrusion
Mandibular Rotation
Openbite Teeth | Teeth and Gum | Dental
Interventions
Biological: vertical holding appliance
Biological: buccal miniscrew and TPA
Registration Number
NCT05433051
Lead Sponsor
Al-Azhar University
Brief Summary

this study is to compare the dental and skeletal changes caused by the intrusion of maxillary first molars buccal miniscrew and TPA versus vertical holding appliance using lateral cephalometry.

Detailed Description

Not available

Recruitment & Eligibility

Status
ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING
Sex
All
Target Recruitment
24
Inclusion Criteria
  • Patients suffering class I or II with AOB.
  • AOB ranged between 3-7 mm assessed from cephalometry.
  • Patients with excess in posterior dentoalveolar height according to Burrstone .
  • Patients with good oral hygiene and general health.
  • Patients with no previous orthodontic treatment.
  • Good quality of lateral cephalometry.
Exclusion Criteria
  • Skeletal open bite
  • previous orthodontic treatment

Study & Design

Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Study Design
PARALLEL
Arm && Interventions
GroupInterventionDescription
vertical holding appliancevertical holding applianceactive comparator double center
Buccal miniscrews with TPAbuccal miniscrew and TPAactive comparator double center
Primary Outcome Measures
NameTimeMethod
amount of skeletal changesPost-intervention at 6 months

amount of mandibular rotation by cephalometry

amount of dentalPost-intervention at 6 months

rate of maxillary molar intrusion by cephalometry

Secondary Outcome Measures
NameTimeMethod

Trial Locations

Locations (1)

Mohamed Shendy

🇪🇬

Cairo, Nasr City, Egypt

© Copyright 2025. All Rights Reserved by MedPath