Evidence Hub

Effect of piezocision corticotomy on en-masse retraction: A randomized controlled trial

Abdulkarim A Hatrom, Khalid H. Zawawi, Reem M Al-Ali, Hanadi Sabban, Talal M Zahid, Ghassan Al-Turki, Ali H. Hassan

Angle Orthodontist, 2020

26 participants · 27 citations

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

To compare the amount of en-masse retraction with or without piezocision corticotomy, to assess the type of tooth movement, to evaluate root integrity after retraction, and to record reported pain levels.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This randomized, controlled clinical trial included 26 orthodontic patients requiring premolar extraction. The patients were divided into two groups: (1) an extraction with piezocision corticotomy group (PCG) and (2) an extraction-only group, which served as the control group (CG). Cone-beam computed tomography images were acquired before and 4 months after the initiation of en-masse retraction utilizing miniscrews. The following variables were assessed: the amount of en-masse retraction, incisor inclination, incisor and canine root resorption, and patient-reported pain.

RESULTS

Twelve and 11 participants completed the entire study in the PCG and CG, respectively. The amount of en-masse retraction was significantly greater in the PCG compared to the CG (mean = 4.8 ± 0.57 mm vs 2.4 ± 0.33 mm, respectively [P < .001]). There was also significantly less tipping and root resorption of incisors in the PCG (P < .05). The reported pain was significantly higher on the first day in the PCG compared to the CG (P < .001); however, it became similar between the groups after 24 hours.

CONCLUSIONS

Piezocision corticotomy enhanced the amount of en-masse retraction two times more with less root resorption. However, future studies are required to assess the…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 26 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free