Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Completed

NCT Number: NCT04999150

Comparison of Corticotomy and Micro-Osteoperforation During Canine Retraction

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.

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

Conditions

Malocclusion, Class I/II Malocclusion Stomatognathic Diseases Tooth Diseases

Age range

12 year–45 year

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Not applicable

Primary location

UPR Medical Sciences Campus

San Juan, 00921, Puerto Rico

About this study

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

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: Yes

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

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

Treatment and study plan

Micro-osteoperforations

Procedure

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 0.014"SS ligature wire at the canine and mini-screw. A Dontrix gauge was used to measure the force (150g)

Other names: MOP

Corticotomy

Procedure

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 0.014"SS ligature wire at the canine and mini-screw. A Dontrix gauge (Orthopli Corp., Philadelphia, PA) was used to measure the force (150g)

Primary outcomes

  1. Canine retraction

    Time frame: 3 months

    Amount of tooth movement (in mm) attained by the maxillary canines after retracting them

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

University of Puerto Rico

Other

Collaborators

  • University of Zagreb

Registry information

Official study title

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

Important dates

Study start
2018
Primary completion
2019
Study completion
2020
First posted
Aug 10, 2021
Registry last updated
Aug 17, 2021

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Related clinical trials

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.