Comparison of the Efficiency of Maxillary Canine Retraction Using Aligners Versus Conventional Brackets in Orthodontic Extraction Cases.

NCT ID: NCT04333836

Last Updated: 2020-04-03

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

UNKNOWN

Clinical Phase

NA

Total Enrollment

10 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2020-07-31

Study Completion Date

2022-01-31

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

The aim of this study is to compare the effectiveness of Clear aligners and Conventional braces for upper canine retraction (space closure) regarding canine tipping , anchorage loss and treatment time.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

Conventional fixed orthodontic treatment with metal brackets has been rejected by some adult patients because of esthetic and social concerns, but the demand for orthodontic treatment is currently increasing. To satisfy the demands and needs of these patients, the emphasis has shifted toward esthetic orthodontic appliance system. Less noticeable appliances such as ceramic, resin, and lingual brackets, or removable clear appliances such as the Essix and Invisalign (Align Technology, Santa Clara, Calif) provide esthetic orthodontic appliance alternatives.

Since the introduction of clear aligners to the public in 1999, it has become a popular treatment choice for clinicians because of the aesthetics and comfort of the removable clear aligners compared with traditional appliances. Several studies have shown significant limitations of this technique, especially in treating complex malocclusions, whereas other studies have reported successfully treated cases with this removable appliance. A systematic review conducted to determine the treatment effects of clear aligners showed that no strong conclusions could be made regarding the treatment effects of aligners . Therefore, clinical trials were still required to investigate the effectiveness of the Invisalign system.

When using the aligners to correct severe crowding, root positions must be carefully controlled during extraction space closure, and clear aligners must be properly grip all teeth to be moved, Tipping was a common problem in premolar extraction cases during the early years of aligners use. Several previous reports have also discussed the limited ability of thermoplastic appliances to control root-tipping movements and to establish root control comparable to that provided by fixed appliances. The investigators describe the extraction treatment of a patient with moderate to severe tooth crowding using mini screws and clear appliances, thus eliminating the need for conventional brackets.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Removable Aligners, Conventional Brackets

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

PARALLEL

Primary Study Purpose

TREATMENT

Blinding Strategy

DOUBLE

Participants Outcome Assessors

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

Aligners group

Receiving full set of aligners ( Clear Removable Orthodontic appliance) until complete canine retraction

Group Type EXPERIMENTAL

Removable Clear Aligners

Intervention Type DEVICE

1. Plaster dental models will be poured from the rubber base impression.
2. Digital dental models will be created through scanning of plaster dental models.
3. Planning of the aligners will be done on 3 shape clear aligner studio®.
4. Aligners will be fabricated on 3d printed models using vacuum formers.
5. Anchorage reinforcement for posterior segments by using buccal miniscrews.
6. Patient will receive the first aligner and will be instructed to wear it full time (except during eating and brushing) for 2 weeks.
7. Patient will receive the following aligner after 2 weeks.
8. Follow up visits every 2 weeks until complete canine retraction.

Conventional Brackets group

leveling and alignment of lower followed by complete canine retraction

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Removable Clear Aligners

Intervention Type DEVICE

1. Plaster dental models will be poured from the rubber base impression.
2. Digital dental models will be created through scanning of plaster dental models.
3. Planning of the aligners will be done on 3 shape clear aligner studio®.
4. Aligners will be fabricated on 3d printed models using vacuum formers.
5. Anchorage reinforcement for posterior segments by using buccal miniscrews.
6. Patient will receive the first aligner and will be instructed to wear it full time (except during eating and brushing) for 2 weeks.
7. Patient will receive the following aligner after 2 weeks.
8. Follow up visits every 2 weeks until complete canine retraction.

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

Removable Clear Aligners

1. Plaster dental models will be poured from the rubber base impression.
2. Digital dental models will be created through scanning of plaster dental models.
3. Planning of the aligners will be done on 3 shape clear aligner studio®.
4. Aligners will be fabricated on 3d printed models using vacuum formers.
5. Anchorage reinforcement for posterior segments by using buccal miniscrews.
6. Patient will receive the first aligner and will be instructed to wear it full time (except during eating and brushing) for 2 weeks.
7. Patient will receive the following aligner after 2 weeks.
8. Follow up visits every 2 weeks until complete canine retraction.

Intervention Type DEVICE

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

* 1\) Moderate to severe crowding orthodontic patients.( Irregularity index of \<5 mm)

2\) Good oral hygiene. (Patient with periodontally sound dentition).

3\) Patient in permanent dentition between the age range 16 - 40 years.

4\) .Patients requiring extraction of mandibular and maxillary first premolars;

5\) Patients having sound general health

Exclusion Criteria

* 1\) Systematic disease.

2\) Poor oral hygiene patients.

3 ) Periodontally affected teeth.
Minimum Eligible Age

16 Years

Maximum Eligible Age

40 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

Cairo University

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Amr Mostafa Osman Ramadan

Principle Inestigator

Responsibility Role PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

Amr Mostafa Osman Ramadan

Cairo, , Egypt

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

Egypt

Facility Contacts

Find local site contact details for specific facilities participating in the trial.

Amr Ramadan, Master 's of orthodontics

Role: primary

0020106801410

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

Aligners in Canine Retraction

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.