Abstract:Introduction: The goal of this retrospective cephalometric study was to compare orthodontic outcomes in patients with maxillary dentoalveolar protrusion malocclusion treated with extraoral headgear or mini-implants for maximum anchorage. Materials: Forty-seven subjects with Angle Class II malocclusion or Class I bimaxillary dentoalveolar protrusion were treated by retracting the maxillary dentoalveolar process by using the extraction space of the bilateral maxillary first premolars. Two anchorage systems were used. Group 1 (n = 22) received traditional anchorage preparation with a transpalatal arch and headgear; group 2 (n = 25) received mini-implants (miniplates, miniscrews, or microscrews) for bony anchorage. Pretreatment and posttreatment lateral cephalograms were superimposed to compare the following parameters between groups: (1) amount of maxillary central incisor retraction, (2) reduction in maxillary central incisor angulation, (3) anchorage loss of the maxillary first molar, (4) movements of the maxillary central incisor and first molar in the vertical direction, and (5) changes in skeletal measurements representing the anteroposterior and vertical jaw relationships. Results: The skeletal anchorage group had greater anterior tooth retraction (8.17 vs 6.73 mm) and less maxillary molar mesialization (0.88 vs 2.07 mm) than did the headgear group, with a shorter treatment duration (29.81 vs 32.29 months). Translational movement of the incisors was more common than tipping movement, and intrusion of the maxillary dentition was greater, in patients receiving miniplates than in those receiving screw-type bony anchorage, resulting in counterclockwise rotation of the mandible and a statistically significant decrease in the mandibular plane angle. Cephalometric analysis of skeletal measurements in patients with low to average mandibular plane angles showed no significant difference between groups, although greater maxillary incisor retraction and less mesial movement of the first molar were noted in the mini-implant group. In patients with a high mandibular plane angle, those receiving skeletal anchorage had genuine intrusion of the maxillary first molar and reduction in the mandibular plane angle, whereas those receiving headgear anchorage had extrusion of the maxillary first molar and an increase of mandibular plane angle. In contrast to the posterior movement in the headgear group, anterior movement of Point A was noted in the mini-implant group. Conclusions: In both the anteroposterior and vertical directions, skeletal anchorage achieved better control than did the traditional headgear appliance during the treatment of maxillary dentoalveolar protrusion. Greater retraction of the maxillary incisor, less anchorage loss of the maxillary first molar, and the possibility of counterclockwise mandibular rotation all facilitated the correction of the Class II malocclusion.

Clinical application on the reinforcement of orthodontic anchorage with micro implant system

Clinical Efficacy of Counterclockwise Rotating the Functional Occlusal Plane Using Micro-Implant Anchorage.

[Stability of Upper Molars with the Application of Implant Anchorage].

Treatment of Severe Dental Crowding with Microscrew Anchorge

Application of the microimplant treatment for Angle's Class Ⅱ Division ⅠMalocclusion with the vertical macroplasia of anterior of superior alveoli

Effectiveness of micro-implant in vertical control during orthodontic extraction treatment in class II adults and adolescents after pubertal growth peak: a systematic review and meta-analysis

[Cephalometric Analysis of Implant Anchorage-Assisted Retraction of Anterior Teeth].

Dentoskeletal and soft tissue changes associated with miniscrew anchorage in customized lingual orthodontics

Therapeutic effect of Micro-Implant Anchorage in orthodontics

The Preliminary Clinical Study of Posterior Vertical Control of High Angle Non-Openbite Extraction Cases Through Microscrew Implant Anchorage

Comparison of treatment outcomes between skeletal anchorage and extraoral anchorage in adults with maxillary dentoalveolar protrusion

Craniofacial changes of high angle extraction cases treated with posterior vertical control through implant anchorage

Preliminary three-dimensional analysis of tooth movement and arch dimension change of the maxillary dentition in Class II division 1 malocclusion treated with first premolar extraction: conventional anchorage vs. mini-implant anchorage

Comparative Analysis of the Effects of Micro-Implant and J Hook Treatment for Adult Patients of Angle Class Ⅱ Division 1 Malocclusion with the Anterior of the Alveolar Vertical Macroplasia

[Clinical Application of Miniscrew Implant for Maximum Anchorage Cases].

[Comparison of Treatment Results Between Implant Anchorage and Traditional Intraoral Anchorage in Patients with Maxillary Protrusion].

Efficacy and safety of micro-implant anchorage in Angle class II malocclusion orthodontic treatment: A protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis

Treatment of Anterior Open Bite Using Miniscrew Anchorage

Vertical dimensional change of upper molars in extraction orthodontic treatment with micro-screw anchorage

[A clinical analysis of screw-retained implant-supported casted integrated abutment crowns in the molar region with limited interocclusal space]

Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing Control Of Maxillary Anchorage With 2 Retraction Techniques Editor'S Comment