Comparison of Corticotomy and Micro-Osteoperforation During Canine Retraction

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
Corticotomy and micro-osteoperforation (MOP) have been proven to accelerate tooth movement and shorten orthodontic treatment time, compared to conventional treatment. MOP is less invasive; however, it is unclear whether it is as effective as a corticotomy. The purpose of this study was to compare the maxillary canine retraction achieved by these techniques.

Detailed Description
-----------------
Thirteen patients (5 females, 8 males; mean age, 18.07±6.74 years) with healthy permanent dentition requiring the extraction of maxillary first premolars were included in a split-mouth randomized clinical trial. Subjects with previous orthodontic or endodontic treatment of canines were excluded. At least 3 months post-extraction, MOPs, and corticotomies were performed distal to the canines. Mini-screws with closed-coil springs (150g) were used for canine retraction. Dental casts were attained at baseline (T0) and 3 months post-intervention (T1). Calibrated examiners measured the distances from the canine to the second premolar on both sides. A Signed-rank sum test was used to compare canine retraction achieved in 3 months (T0-T1) in two sides

Official Title
-----------------
A Split-Mouth Randomized Clinical Trial for the Comparison of Corticotomy and Micro-Osteoperforations During Canine Retraction: A Pilot Study

Conditions
-----------------
Malocclusion, Class I/II

Intervention / Treatment
-----------------
* Procedure: Micro-Osteoperforations
* Procedure: Corticotomy


Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: Healthy permanent dentition requiring the extraction of maxillary first premolars with less than 8mm of maxillary anterior crowding Exclusion Criteria: Previous orthodontic or endodontic treatment of the canines

Ages Eligible for Study
-----------------
Minimum Age: 12 Years
Maximum Age: 45 Years

Sexes Eligible for Study
-----------------
All

Accepts Healthy Volunteers
-----------------
Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Study Plan
=================
How is the study designed?
-----------------

Design Details

Primary Purpose: Treatment
Allocation: Randomized
Intervention Model: Parallel Assignment
Interventional Model Description: a split-mouth randomized clinical trial.
Masking: Double


Arms and Interventions

| Participant Group/Arm | Intervention/Treatment |
| --- | --- |
| Active Comparator: Corticotomy<br>A full-thickness labial mucoperiosteal flap was reflected. Two vertical corticotomies (1 mesial and 1 distal to the canine) were performed . The cortical bone was cut 2 to 3 mm below the alveolar crest towards the apex until bone marrow was exposed. Cortical-cancellous bone grafts (0.5cc; PuraGraft, Kingwood, TX) were placed at the corticotomy sites. The mini-screws were placed. A nickel-titanium (NiTi) closed-coil spring was placed and secured with a 0.014SS ligature wire at the canine and mini-screw. A Dontrix gauge (Orthopli Corp., Philadelphia, PA) was used to measure the force (150g). | Procedure: Corticotomy<br>* A full-thickness labial mucoperiosteal flap was reflected. Two vertical corticotomies (1 mesial and 1 distal to the canine) were performed. The cortical bone was cut 2 to 3 mm below the alveolar crest towards the apex, until bone marrow was exposed. Cortical-cancellous bone grafts (0.5cc; PuraGraft, Kingwood, TX) were placed at the corticotomy sites. The mini-screws were placed. A nickel-titanium (NiTi) closed-coil spring was placed and secured with a 0.014SS ligature wire at the canine and mini-screw. A Dontrix gauge (Orthopli Corp., Philadelphia, PA) was used to measure the force (150g)<br>|
| Experimental: Micro-Osteoperforation<br>MOPs were performed with a stainless-steel manual drill tip that had 1.6mm diameter with an adjustable depth set to 5mm (Excellerator® RT; Propel Orthodontics, Milpitas, CA). Six perforations were made along 2 parallel vertical lines (each line with 3 holes spaced  2mm apart) distal to the canine and perpendicular to the buccal cortical bone. The mini-screws were placed. A NiTi closed-coil spring was placed and secured with a 0.014SS ligature wire at the canine and mini-screw. A Dontrix gauge was used to measure the force (150g). | Procedure: Micro-Osteoperforations<br>* MOPs were performed with a stainless-steel manual drill tip that had 1.6mm diameter with an adjustable depth set to 5mm (Excellerator® RT; Propel Orthodontics, Milpitas, CA). Six perforations were made along 2 parallel vertical lines (each line with 3 holes spaced  2mm apart) distal to the canine and perpendicular to the buccal cortical bone. The mini-screws were placed. A NiTi closed-coil spring was placed and secured with a 0.014SS ligature wire at the canine and mini-screw. A Dontrix gauge was used to measure the force (150g)<br>* Other names: MOP;|

What is the study measuring?
-----------------
Primary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Canine retraction | Amount of tooth movement (in mm) attained by the maxillary canines after retracting them | 3 months | 

 Terms related to the study
=================
Keywords Provided by Centre Hospitalier Valida
-----------------
Corticotomy; MOP; Tooth movement