Skip Navigation

The European Journal of Orthodontics 2008 30(3):283-287; doi:10.1093/ejo/cjm128
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Ma, J.
Right arrow Articles by Smales, R. J.
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Ma, J.
Right arrow Articles by Smales, R. J.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2008. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Orthodontic Society. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org.

Comparative evaluation of micro-implant and headgear anchorage used with a pre-adjusted appliance system

Junqing Ma*, Lin Wang*, Weibing Zhang*, Wenjing Chen*, Chunyang Zhao* and Roger J. Smales**

* Dental Research Institute, School of Stomatology, Nanjing Medical University, PR China
** School of Dentistry, University of Adelaide, Australia

Address for correspondence Professor Lin Wang, Department of Orthodontics, School of Stomatology, Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing 210029, PR China, E-mail: majunq{at}163.com


   Abstract

The aim of this study was to compare and evaluate the anchorage effectiveness of using either micro-implants or extraoral headgear with the McLaughlin–Bennett–Trevisi (MBT) system.

Thirty young Chinese adults (14 males and 16 females) aged 18–22 years with anterior bimaxillary protrusion were divided randomly into two equal groups, treated with the MBT system anchored by either micro-implants or headgear. Nine measurements obtained before and after treatment from lateral cephalometric radiographs were assessed for the two groups, using the Mann–Whitney U test with {alpha} = 0.05 for statistical significance.

The maxillary incisors in the micro-implant group were significantly more retracted and intruded, while the lower incisors were more lingually inclined, than in the headgear group. The occlusal and mandibular planes were rotated more counterclockwise in the micro-implant group than in the headgear group (P < 0.05).

Compared with headgear anchorage, micro-implant anchorage may counteract clockwise rotation of the occlusal and mandibular planes and result in different final positions for the maxillary and mandibular incisors.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.