## 4 Discussion  
This study aims to evaluate the clinical efficiency of maxillary and mandibular total arch distalization by analyzing and investigating the stability of TAD-assisted total arch distalization in adult patients. In an earlier study on mandibular molar distalization \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & \multicolumn{10}{c}{**T2-T1**} \\ \cline{2-11}  & \multicolumn{2}{c}{\(\Delta\)**U1t-PTV**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{\(\Delta\)**U6t-PTV**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{\(\Delta\)**U7t-PTV**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{\(\Delta\)**U6-SN**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{\(\Delta\)**U7-SN**} \\ \cline{2-11}  & \(\mathbf{r}\) & **Sig** & \(\mathbf{r}\) & **Sig** & \(\mathbf{r}\) & **Sig** & \(\mathbf{r}\) & **Sig** \\ \hline \hline
**Skeletal pattern (T0)** & & & & & & & & & \\
**ANB** & \(\mathbf{-0.419}\)* & 0.030 & \(\mathbf{-0.437}\)* & 0.023 & \(\mathbf{-0.401}\)* & 0.038 & 0.074 & 0.714 & \(-0.068\) & 0.735 \\
**SN-MP** & \(\mathbf{-0.109}\) & 0.587 & 0.011 & 0.956 & 0.008 & 0.968 & \(-0.047\) & 0.815 & \(-0.174\) & 0.386 \\
**Facial Height Ratio** & 0.029 & 0.884 & \(-0.105\) & 0.602 & \(-0.077\) & 0.704 & 0.008 & 0.967 & 0.164 & 0.413 \\
**Retention Period** & 0.050 & 0.806 & 0.093 & 0.643 & 0.144 & 0.472 & 0.286 & 0.149 & 0.166 & 0.408 \\
**Treatment changes (T1-T0)** & & & & & & & & & & \\
**AUTU-PTV** & \(\mathbf{-0.355}\) & 0.069 & \(\mathbf{-0.417}\)* & 0.031 & \(\mathbf{-0.498}\)** & 0.008 & \(-0.274\) & 0.166 & \(-0.120\) & 0.553 \\
**AUTU6-PTV** & \(\mathbf{-0.543}\)** & 0.003 & \(\mathbf{-0.623}\)** & 0.001 & \(\mathbf{-0.674}\)** & 0.000 & \(-0.093\) & 0.644 & \(-0.121\) & 0.549 \\
**AUTU7-PTV** & \(\mathbf{-0.399}\)* & 0.039 & \(\mathbf{-0.474}\)* & 0.013 & \(\mathbf{-0.599}\)** & 0.001 & \(-0.229\) & 0.251 & \(-0.176\) & 0.381 \\
**AUTU8-SN** & 0.107 & 0.595 & 0.219 & 0.272 & 0.165 & 0.412 & \(-0.252\) & 0.204 & 0.010 & 0.960 \\
**AUTV7-SN** & \(\mathbf{-0.187}\) & 0.350 & \(-0.016\) & 0.936 & \(-0.138\) & 0.492 & \(-0.143\) & 0.476 & \(-0.191\) & 0.341 \\
**AUTV6 rot** & 0.205 & 0.306 & \(-0.181\) & 0.377 & \(-0.038\) & 0.851 & \(-0.010\) & 0.961 & \(-0.138\) & 0.491 \\
**AUTV7 rot** & \(-0.001\) & 0.997 & 0.169 & 0.400 & \(-0.145\) & 0.469 & \(-0.198\) & 0.374 & \(-0.138\) & 0.751 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}  
* \(\mathbf{r}<0.05\); ** \(\mathbf{r}<0.01\); *** \(\mathbf{r}<0.001\).  
\end{table} 
Table 6: [PERSON]’s correlation coefficients between post-treatment changes and other variables in the maxilla. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & \multicolumn{10}{c}{**T2-T1**} \\ \cline{2-11}  & \multicolumn{2}{c}{\(\Delta\)**L1t-PTV**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{\(\Delta\)**L6t-PTV**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{\(\Delta\)**LT7t-PTV**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{\(\Delta\)**L6-MP**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{\(\Delta\)**LT7-MP**} \\ \cline{2-11}  & \(\mathbf{r}\) & **Sig** & \(\mathbf{r}\) & **Sig** & \(\mathbf{r}\) & **Sig** & \(\mathbf{r}\) & **Sig** & \(\mathbf{r}\) & **Sig** \\ \hline \hline
**Skeletal pattern (T0)** & & & & & & & & & \\
**ANB** & \(\mathbf{-0.027}\) & 0.906 & \(-0.122\) & 0.587 & \(-0.079\) & 0.727 & 0.121 & 0.593 & 0.043 & 0.850 \\
**SN-MP** & \(-0.074\) & 0.743 & 0.225 & 0.314 & 0.242 & 0.277 & 0.038 & 0.868 & 0.094 & 0.677 \\
**Facial Height Ratio** & \(-0.004\) & 0.985 & \(-0.268\) & 0.228 & \(-0.262\) & 0.239 & \(-0.006\) & 0.980 & \(-0.112\) & 0.618 \\ \hline \hline
**Retention Period** & \(-0.318\) & 0.149 & \(-0.224\) & 0.315 & 0.012 & 0.957 & \(-0.113\) & 0.617 & \(-0.144\) & 0.522 \\ \hline \hline
**Treatment changes (T1-T0)** & & & & & & & & & \\
**AL1t-PTV** & \(-0.188\) & 0.402 & \(\mathbf{-0.572}\)** & 0.005 & \(\mathbf{-0.613}\)** & 0.002 & 0.170 & 0.450 & \(-0.102\) & 0.650 \\
**AL6t-PTV** & \(-0.131\) & 0.562 & \(\mathbf{-0.664}\)** & 0.001 &  
using miniplates, it was reported that its stability was maintained for over a year [25]. However, no cases have yet been reported on the stability of total arch distalization using skeletal anchorage.