• Users Online: 297
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
Home About us Editorial board Ahead of print Current issue Search Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Year : 2015  |  Volume : 5  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 49-55

Comparison of Intrusive Effects of Mini screws and Burrstone Intrusive Arch: A Radiographic Study


1 PG Student, Department of Orthodontics, Thai Moogambigai Dental College and Hospital, Chennai, India
2 Senior Lecturer, Department of Orthodontics, Institute of Dental Sciences, SOA University, Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India
3 Reader, Department of Orthodontics, Kalinga Institute of Dental sciences, Bhubaneswar, Odisha, India
4 Professor and Head, Department of Orthodontics, Thai Moogambigai Dental College and Hospital, Chennai, India
5 Professor, Department of Orthodontics, Thai Moogambigai Dental College and Hospital, Chennai, India
6 Reader, Department of Orthodontics, Thai Moogambigai Dental College and Hospital, Chennai, India

Correspondence Address:
Pritam Mohanty
Reader, Department of Orthodontics, Kalinga Institute of Dental sciences, Bhubaneswar, Odisha
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


Rights and PermissionsRights and Permissions

Aim: This prospective study was done to compare the effects of incisor intrusion obtained with the aid of miniscrews and burstone intrusive arch. Materials and Methods: Twenty- patients with deep bite of at least 4 mm were divided to 2 groups. In group1, 10 patients (6 males, 4 females; mean age group of 14-20 years) in the postpubertal growth period were treated by using burstone intrusive arches and in group 2, 10 patients (6 male, 4 female; age group of 14-20 years) were treated using miniscrews. Lateral cephalometric head films were taken at the beginning of treatment and after intrusion for the evaluation of the treatment changes. Statistical analyses of the data were performed with a significance level of p<0.001. Results: The changes in the center of resistance of the incisors were 4.3 mm (P <0.001) for group 1; and 4.3 mm (P<0.001) for group 2.The mean change in the angle of upper incisor to palatal plane was 10.90; p<0.001. The change in distance from upper molar to VR (mm) is 4.2 mm p <0.001. The change in Upper 1st molar to SN plane angle in burstone intrusive arch was 4.90 (83.70± 2.264 to 78.80± 2.448) p <0.001. And in mini implant, the change in upper incisor to palatal plane angle is 10 (71.40± 1.43 to 72.40 ± 1.506) p > 0.001 which is statistically not significant. The maxillary molar showed no movement in the miniscrew group and molar moved distally at an average of 4.90 in intrusive arch group. Conclusions: Both the mini implant and the utility arches are equally effective in intrusion of upper incisors. Mini implant gives true intrusion. Vertical height of molars does not change much with Mini implant while molar extrusion can be seen with intrusive arch.


[PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed1026    
    Printed32    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded119    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal