Study Results
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.
COMPLETED
NA
12 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2017-09-01
2019-06-05
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Evaluation of Two Approaches of Micro-osteoperforations (MOPs) During Orthodontic Canine Retraction
NCT04868721
Micro-osteoperforations on the Rate of Canine Retraction
NCT04968327
Maxillary Canine Retraction Assisted With Micro-osteoperforations Versus Injectable Platelet Rich Fibrin
NCT05960825
Effect of Micro-osteoperforation on the Rate of Canine Retraction
NCT03450278
Evaluation of Micro-osteoperforation on Rate of Maxillary En-masse Retraction
NCT03764189
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
This study was conducted on a total sample of 24 canines of 12 patients, 8 females and 4 males, with mean age was 16.17 ± 2.29 years old who required therapeutic extraction of maxillary 1st premolars and canine retraction. They were selected randomly from the Outpatient Clinic, Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dental Medicine (Boys), Al-Azhar University, Cairo, Egypt.
Both maxillary canines, in each patient, were randomly assigned to either an experimental side or the control side in a simple split-mouth design. In the experimental side, micro-osteoperforations was performed distal to the maxillary canine before starting retraction, while the canines in the contralateral control side were retracted without micro-osteoperforations.
Extraction was done at the start of the treatment, and before fitting of the orthodontic appliance. Then upper dental arches were leveled and aligned using conventional sequences of wires.
Three flapless micro-osteoperforations was performed by using orthodontic miniscrews distal to the maxillary canines in the experimental side before starting retraction. Each perforation was 1.6 mm in diameter and 3-4 mm depth into the bone. Canines were completely retracted on 0.016 × 0.022 ̋ stainless steel wires by using closed coil spring delivered 150 gm force.
Patients were followed up every 28 days until complete canine retraction. Routine orthodontic records were obtained for each patient before treatment.
Additionally, a full skull CBCT images were taken before treatment and immediately after canine retraction.
The rate of canine retraction was assessed clinically; in addition, cone beam CT (CBCT) scans were used to assess the amount of canine retraction root length changes. Also anchorage loss of first permanent molars were assessed.
The treatment results were compared clinically and radiographically (CBCT).
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
TREATMENT
NONE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Conventional side
Canine retraction was commenced without micro-osteoperforations.
No interventions assigned to this group
Mops side
Canine retraction was commenced with micro-osteoperforations.
Micro-osteoperforation
three flapless micro-osteoperforations was performed distal to the maxillary canine before starting retraction.
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Micro-osteoperforation
three flapless micro-osteoperforations was performed distal to the maxillary canine before starting retraction.
Other Intervention Names
Discover alternative or legacy names that may be used to describe the listed interventions across different sources.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
2. Class II division 1 malocclusion or Class I bimaxillary protrusion with mild or no crowding. Wherever crowding was present, it was symmetrical on both sides of the arch.
3. Patients who diagnosed to require extraction of at least maxillary first premolars bilaterally as a part of their treatment plan.
4. Complete permanent dentition (3rdmolars were not included).
5. Good oral and general health.
6. No history of periodontal problems.
7. No therapeutic intervention planned involving intermaxillary or other intraoral or extraoral appliances during the study period.
Exclusion Criteria
2. Transverse and/or vertical skeletal dysplasia or craniofacial anomalies.
3. Systemic diseases or regular use of medications that could interfere with orthodontic treatment.
4. Previous orthodontic treatment.
14 Years
18 Years
ALL
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Ahmed Akram Elawady
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Ahmed Akram Elawady
Principal Investigator
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Ahmed El Awady
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Al-Azhar University
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Al azhar university
Cairo, , Egypt
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
100
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.