Comparison of Two Methods for Canine Retraction Depending on Direct Skeletal Anchorage System (CR-DSAS)
Mahmoud Al Suleiman*, Manal Shehadah
Introduction:
Various anchorage techniques have been used for canine retraction. Traditional anchorage techniques have not always been very efficient. Recently, Temporary anchorage devices such as miniscrews are considered to be an effective source of anchorage for canine retraction. The purpose of this study was to compare between elastic chain and closed coil in retracting upper canines when using miniscrews as skeletal anchorage in class 2 division1 cases.
Methods:
Twenty-two patients with class 2 division 1 were treated with preadjusted appliances. Depending on miniscrews as direct skeletal anchorage, elastic chain and closed coil were used to retract upper canines after first premolar extraction. Cephalometric radiographs and cast models were been used to evaluate canine retraction. Results were analyzed by SPSS 15 using T student test.
Results:
Upper canines were retracted in 5-5.5 month; Canine crowns were retracted 6.97mm by elastic chain and 7.08 mm by closed coil. Canine apices were retracted 1.06mm by elastic chain and 1.43mm by closed coil. Anchorage loss with miniscrews was 0.07-0.2 mm.
Conclusions:
Miniscrews provide absolute skeletal anchorage, Canine movement with skeletal anchorage is faster than traditional techniques, Canines tipped distally when retracted depending on direct skeletal anchorage, and there was no statistical differences between elastic chain and closed coil in retracting canines.
