Malocclusion
Conditions
Keywords
micro-osteperforation, orthodontic tooth movement, treatment duration
Brief summary
The main purpose is to compare overall alignment time (OAT) in days in alleviating mandibular incisors crowding between control group and MOPs group.Furthermore, to investigate the presence of volumetric root resorption from CBCT, gingival recession and formation of black triangle post lower labial segment alignment between micro-osteoperforations group and control group.
Detailed description
Prolonged treatment time in orthodontics is an undesirable side effect for both the patient and clinician. Usually, an average course of comprehensive orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances requires less than 2 years to complete (19.9 months). This prolonged treatment time may cause adverse effects such as root resorption, gingival recession, caries & enamel demineralization. Micro-osteoperforations is safe, minimally invasive technique which perforations are performed through the gum tissues, penetrating the bone without the need to raise a flap.Control group will not received any MOP and will receive standard orthodontic treatment.
Interventions
DEVICEMicro-osteoperforations
MOPs will be performed using SIA Excalibur Mini-Implant with dimension 1.6 mm in width and length of 6 mm, screw 3 mm depth into buccal bone of intervention sites
Sponsors
University of Malaya
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
SINGLE (Outcomes Assessor)
Masking description
Blinding of either patient or clinician is not possible during allocation, treatment and data collection. However, blinding can be ensured during data processing, analysing stages and data collection for secondary outcomes on total volume of root resorption from CBCT, formation of black triangle and gingiva recession
Intervention model description
The start date of lower labial segment alignment (T1) was recorded after insertion of the lower 0.014'' NiTi archwire. Participants were reviewed every 6 weeks and repeated MOPs were performed for the MOP group until the completion of lower labial segment alignment (LLS), which is when the LII scores one, indicating a minimum irregularity of ≤ 2 mm contact point displacement, based on the contact point displacements of the mandibular anterior segment, from canine to canine. At the end of alignment stage, the date for completion of alignment was recorded (T2), from which the overall alignment time (OAT) in days, required to complete LLS alignment, were calculated. Measurements were done clinically using an electric digital caliper. At this point, perforations were stopped. Gingival recession and black triangle were then recorded and measured. Patients were referred for CBCT images to evaluate for root resorption.
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 45 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes
Inclusion criteria
* Gender : Male and Female * Age range : ≥ 18years to 45 years old * Crowding of 3mm - 7mm on lower labial segment (lower right canine to lower left canine) which does not require extractions in the lower arch * Class II div I Incisor relationship with extraction of both upper 1st premolars * Maximum anchorage control with temporary anchorage device ( TAD) , with Molar Class II (¼ to full unit) malocclusion * Average vertical facial proportions * No systemic disease * Acceptable good oral hygiene * No periodontal disease
Exclusion criteria
* Smokers * Distally angulated canines * History of trauma (crown fracture or avulsion and re-implantation) , endodontic treatment * Missing permanent mandibular anterior teeth ( Hypodontia) / Retained deciduous teeth in mandibular anterior area * Habits eg: fingernails biting , toothpick user , using hard toothbrush * Vertical skeletal discrepancies eg high angle and low angle * Systemic disease especially on long term use of antibiotics, phenytoin, cyclosporin, anti-inflammatory drugs, systemic corticosteroid and calcium channel blockers * Poor oral hygiene for more than 3 visits * Current periodontal disease
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 1. To compare the duration to align the lower labial segment (33-43), between regular and irregular review groups from the conventional (control group). | 5 months | Total treatment time needed to achieved lower labial segment alignment until Little's irregularity index scores one, indicating a minimum irregularity of ≤ 2 mm contact point displacement, based on the contact point displacements of the mandibular anterior segment, from canine to canine |
| 2. To compare the duration to align the lower labial segment (33-43), between regular and irregular review groups from the micro-osteoperforations group. | 5 months | Total treatment time needed to achieved lower labial segment alignment until Little's irregularity index scores one, indicating a minimum irregularity of ≤ 2 mm contact point displacement, based on the contact point displacements of the mandibular anterior segment, from canine to canine |
| 3. To compare the duration to align the lower labial segment (33-43), between micro-osteoperforations and control group in the regular review group. | 5 months | Total treatment time needed to achieved lower labial segment alignment until Little's irregularity index scores one, indicating a minimum irregularity of ≤ 2 mm contact point displacement, based on the contact point displacements of the mandibular anterior segment, from canine to canine |
| 4. To compare the duration to align the lower labial segment (33-43), between micro-osteoperforations and control group in the irregular review group. | 5 months | Total treatment time needed to achieved lower labial segment alignment until Little's irregularity index scores one, indicating a minimum irregularity of ≤ 2 mm contact point displacement, based on the contact point displacements of the mandibular anterior segment, from canine to canine |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Gingival recession between micro-osteoperforations and control group. | 5 months | Gingival recession assessed in millimetre (mm) from cement-enamel junction (CEJ) to free gingival margin using electric digital calliper with an accuracy of 0.01mm, at baseline and end LLS alignment |
| Black triangle between micro-osteoperforations and control group. | 5 months | Presence of black triangle for interdental at baseline and end of LLS alignment |
| Total volume of root resorption with micro-osteoperforations group vs the control group | 5 months | Total volume of root resorption in cubic millimeter (mm3) using 3D Cone Beam CT imaging scanner compare at baseline and end of LLS alignment |
Countries
Malaysia
Outcome results
None listed