Comparison of Corticotomy and Micro-Osteoperforation During Canine Retraction

Not Applicable

Completed

• Conditions: Malocclusion, Class I/II
• Interventions: Procedure: Corticotomy; Procedure: Micro-Osteoperforations

• Registration Number: NCT04999150
• Lead Sponsor: University of Puerto Rico

Brief Summary

Corticotomy and micro-osteoperforation (MOP) have been proven to accelerate tooth movement and shorten orthodontic treatment time, compared to conventional treatment. MOP is less invasive; however, it is unclear whether it is as effective as a corticotomy. The purpose of this study was to compare the maxillary canine retraction achieved by these techniques.

Detailed Description

Thirteen patients (5 females, 8 males; mean age, 18.07±6.74 years) with healthy permanent dentition requiring the extraction of maxillary first premolars were included in a split-mouth randomized clinical trial. Subjects with previous orthodontic or endodontic treatment of canines were excluded. At least 3 months post-extraction, MOPs, and corticotomies were performed distal to the canines. Mini-screws with closed-coil springs (150g) were used for canine retraction. Dental casts were attained at baseline (T0) and 3 months post-intervention (T1). Calibrated examiners measured the distances from the canine to the second premolar on both sides. A Signed-rank sum test was used to compare canine retraction achieved in 3 months (T0-T1) in two sides

Study Timeline

• Study Start: 2018-10-02
• Primary Completion: 2019-07-11
• Study Completion: 2020-09-26
• Status Verified: 2021-08
• Study First Submitted: 2021-08-09
• Study First Submitted QC: 2021-08-09
• Study First Posted: 2021-08-10
• Last Update Submitted: 2021-08-10
• Last Update Posted: 2021-08-17

Recruitment & Eligibility

• Status: COMPLETED
• Sex: All
• Target Recruitment: 13

Inclusion Criteria

• Healthy permanent dentition requiring the extraction of maxillary first premolars with less than 8mm of maxillary anterior crowding

Exclusion Criteria

• Previous orthodontic or endodontic treatment of the canines

Study & Design

• Study Type: INTERVENTIONAL
• Study Design: PARALLEL

Arm && Interventions

Group	Intervention	Description
Corticotomy	Corticotomy	1. A full-thickness labial mucoperiosteal flap was reflected. 2. Two vertical corticotomies (1 mesial and 1 distal to the canine) were performed . The cortical bone was cut 2 to 3 mm below the alveolar crest towards the apex until bone marrow was exposed. 3. Cortical-cancellous bone grafts (0.5cc; PuraGraft, Kingwood, TX) were placed at the corticotomy sites. 4. The mini-screws were placed. 5. A nickel-titanium (NiTi) closed-coil spring was placed and secured with a 0.014"SS ligature wire at the canine and mini-screw. A Dontrix gauge (Orthopli Corp., Philadelphia, PA) was used to measure the force (150g).
Micro-Osteoperforation	Micro-Osteoperforations	1. MOPs were performed with a stainless-steel manual drill tip that had 1.6mm diameter with an adjustable depth set to 5mm (Excellerator® RT; Propel Orthodontics, Milpitas, CA). 2. Six perforations were made along 2 parallel vertical lines (each line with 3 holes spaced \~2mm apart) distal to the canine and perpendicular to the buccal cortical bone. 3. The mini-screws were placed. 4. A NiTi closed-coil spring was placed and secured with a 0.014"SS ligature wire at the canine and mini-screw. A Dontrix gauge was used to measure the force (150g).

Primary Outcome Measures

Name	Time	Method
Canine retraction	3 months	Amount of tooth movement (in mm) attained by the maxillary canines after retracting them

Trial Locations

Locations (1)

UPR Medical Sciences Campus; 🇵🇷 San Juan, Puerto Rico