Comparison of conventional and accelerated orthodontic treatment

Comparison of canine retraction by conventional and corticotomy-facilitated methods: A split mouth clinical study

Status

Active, not recruiting

Phases

Phase 2Phase 3

Study type

Interventional

Source

CTRI

Registry ID

CTRI/2020/03/024160

Enrollment

Registered

2020-03-23

Start date

Unknown

Completion date

Unknown

Last updated

2021-11-24

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

None listed

Interventions

Intervention1: Corticotomy followed by separate canine retraction: Corticotomy followed by separate canine retraction after leveling and alignment Control Intervention1: Separate canine retraction: Se

Eligibility

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: Age range: 18-25 years Cases requiring extraction of upper 1st premolars Full complement of permanent teeth upto 2nd molars. Probing depth less than 4mm in all teeth. Gingival and plaque index less than or equal to 1

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: Long-term use of antibiotics, phenytoin, cyclosporin, anti-inflammatory drugs, systemic corticosteroids, and calcium channel blockers. Poor oral hygiene Systemic diseases Evidence of bone loss Periodontal disease Smoking Probing depth more than 4 mm in any tooth.

Design outcomes

Primary

Measure	Time frame
Rate of canine retractionTimepoint: Every 4 weeks till the end of canine retraction	—

Secondary

Measure	Time frame
Root resorption of caninesTimepoint: Every 4th week till the end of canine retraction	—

Countries

India

Contacts

Public ContactMonis Raza

ITS-CDSR

payalsharma@its.edu.in9212708451

Outcome results