The effect of micro-osteoperforations on the rate of orthodontic tooth movement in animal model: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Introduction: The long passing time for tooth movement (TM) is one of the challenges in orthodontic. complications such as gingival recession, root resorption, and caries are common in orthodontic. To address this, there is an increased tendency to find safe and effective methods to accelerating tooth movement. A surgical method such as micro-osteoperforations (MOP) accelerating the TM. The current meta-analysis aims to investigate the outcome of MOP in accelerating TM in animal studies. Methods: In the present meta-analysis, we evaluated 6 studies that focused on the effect of MOP on TM with the following keywords: (((MOP* OR micro-osteoperforations*) AND (("accelerating tooth movement " OR " tooth movement" AND " orthodontic tooth movement " OR " orthodontic ") until May 2021. Results: The results have shown there is significant difference in TM after using MOP (MD: 0.31, 95%CI: 0.20, 0.42, P < 0.00001, I2 = 76%). Subgroup analysis revealed that though experimental duration in both less than 4-week and more than 4-week, the TM were significant difference between MOP and controls. Besides, in both force subgroups including less than 100 g and more than 100g, the TM was a significant difference between MOP and controls. Conclusion: This meta-analysis found that generally MOP has a positive effect on TM.

Low-level laser therapy, piezocision, or their combination vs. conventional treatment for orthodontic tooth movement : A hierarchical 6-arm split-mouth randomized clinical trial.

PURPOSE: The use non-invasive or minimally invasive methods to accelerate orthodontic tooth movements (OTM) is desirable. In this regard, low-level laser therapy (LLLT, photobiomodulation) and piezocision are suggested. However, because the efficacies of these methods remain controversial/inconclusive, we investigated and compared these two methods. METHODS: Sixty-four quadrants in 32 patients were randomized into three parallel intervention groups of 22, 22, and 20 (6 parallel arms, n = 64 treatment/control sides). Bilateral first premolars were extracted and canine retraction commenced. In each group, one side of the mouth was randomly selected as control, while the other side underwent each of three interventions: LLLT (940 nm, 8 J, 0.5 W, 16 s, 12 sites), piezocision, and "LLLT + piezocision". At the 3rd, 6th, and 9th follow-up weeks, canine retraction and anchorage loss were measured. Data were analyzed statistically (α = 0.05). RESULTS: After 9 weeks, LLLT, piezocision, and LLLT + piezocision improved canine retraction by 0.51, 1.14, and 1.93 mm, respectively. LLLT accelerated canine retraction (compared to control) by 1.6-, 1.4-, and 1.2-fold in the 3rd, 6th, and 9th week, respectively. These statistics were 2.1-, 1.7-, and 1.5-fold for piezocision and 2.7-, 2.1-, and 1.8-fold for LLLT + piezocision. Compared to controls, each intervention showed significant retraction acceleration (p < 0.05). The effect of LLLT + piezocision was greater than that of isolated piezocision (p < 0.05), which itself was greater than that for isolated LLLT (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: All three methods accelerated OTM, with the combination of LLLT + piezocision producing the strongest and LLLT producing the weakest acceleration.

Efficiency and side effects of a novel method for maxillary central root torque (a horizontal box loop of round wire) in comparison with the conventional rectangular wire: A finite element study.

INTRODUCTION: Applying root torque using conventional methods (rectangular wire) has side effects such as inverse and destructive forces, undesirable torque on adjacent teeth, heavy forces that are limited in range and duration, and needing too many sessions. We introduce a new method (a horizontal box loop [HBL]) that is designed to reduce many of these side effects; we tested its efficiency and side effects using finite element analysis. METHODS: An HBL was created from a 0.018-in round stainless steel archwire, in the form of an equilateral triangle of 7 mm sides, for the permanent maxillary left central incisor. As a control, a SS rectangular wire (19 × 25-in) was used. First, a pilot simulation was performed to standardize the torque in both models as 31.099 N mm. The extent of twisting by the rectangular wire, of which the same amount of moment would be applied, was estimated at 28.282°. The main study evaluated the effects of the 31.099 N.mm moments applied by both models to the left central incisor on stresses, dental movements (buccolingually, mesiodistally, and extrusive or intrusive), and intercanine or intermolar widths. RESULTS: Under standardized conditions, the HBL causes a greater palatal root torque of the central incisor than the rectangular wire. The HBL does not apply reverse root torque on adjacent teeth, whereas the rectangular wire causes reverse root torque in neighboring teeth. The HBL also causes less extrusion and expansion in the molar area than does the rectangular wire. The HBL increases intercanine width, whereas the rectangular wire might not change it. CONCLUSIONS: HBL of round wire seems an appropriate appliance and hence its clinical assessment is recommended.