Malocclusion, Angle Class II, Division 1, Bimaxillary Protrusion, Class I Malocclusion
Conditions
Keywords
canine retraction, Low-level laser therapy, laser, piezocision, piezosurgery, orthodontic canine retraction
Brief summary
This comparative controlled clinical study aims to evaluate and compare the effectiveness of piezocision and low-level laser therapy (LLLT) as adjunctive interventions to accelerate orthodontic canine retraction. Participants will be randomly assigned to one of three groups: piezocision, LLLT, or a control group (no adjunctive procedure). The study will assess the impact of these interventions on the rate of tooth movement, the type of tooth movement, and patient experience.
Interventions
PROCEDURELow Level Laser Therapy
On both right and left sides, LLLT will be performed at the beginning of canine retraction, after 3, 7, 14 days, and then every 14 days for a total four-month period.
PROCEDUREPiezocision
On both right and left sides, a minimally invasive flapless piezocision procedure will be performed each month from the beginning of the canine retraction for a total four-month period.
Sponsors
Hesham Nabil Ali Al-Qamhawy
Al-Azhar University
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
SINGLE (Outcomes Assessor)
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 25 Years
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
* Age range 18-25 years. * Patients with crowding or protrusion requiring at least bilateral maxillary first premolar extraction followed by symmetrical canine retraction. * Full set of permanent dentition (third molar not considered). * Patients with good oral hygiene.
Exclusion criteria
* Previous orthodontic treatment. * Patients taking medications or suffering from systemic conditions that can affect orthodontic tooth movement. * Active periodontal diseases and/or untreated carious lesions. * Congenital orofacial deformities. Discontinuation criteria: * Multiple missing appointments. * Poor oral hygiene. * Multiple broken appliances to the extent that interferes with obtaining the treatment objectives.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Rate of canine retraction | Four months from the beginning of maxillary canine retraction. | The rate of distal movement of the maxillary canine measured in millimeters per month (mm/month). |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Maxillary canine rotation and tipping. | Four months from the beginning of maxillary canine retraction. | Measured in degrees |
| Maxillary first molar mesial movement | Four months from the beginning of maxillary canine retraction. | Maxillary first molar mesial movement (measured in mm) |
| Maxillary first molar rotatiob | Four months from the beginning of maxillary canine retraction. | (measured in degrees). |
| Patient-Reported Pain Intensity | Four months from the beginning of maxillary canine retraction. | Pain intensity will be measured using a 10-centimeter Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). The scale ranges from 0 to 10, where 0 represents "no pain" and 10 represents "the worst possible pain" . Therefore, higher scores indicate a worse outcome (greater pain intensity). |
Countries
Egypt
Contacts
CONTACTHesham N Al-Qamhawy
STUDY_CHAIRFarouk A Hussein, Professor
Professor in Orthodontics; Faculty of Dental Medicine, Boys, Cairo; Al-Azhar University
Outcome results
None listed