» Articles » PMID: 25657985

Canine Retraction: A Systematic Review of Different Methods Used

Overview
Journal J Orthod Sci
Date 2015 Feb 7
PMID 25657985
Citations 13
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Canine retraction is a very important step in treatment of patients with crowding, or first premolar extraction cases. In severe crowding cases until, the canines have been distilized to relive the crowding, space to correctly align the incisors will not be available. Correct positioning of the canines after retraction is of great importance for the function, stability, and esthetics. The aim of this systematic review was to examine, in an evidence-based way, which kinds of canine retraction methods/techniques are most effective and which have the least side effects. A literature survey was performed by applying the Medline Database (Entrez PubMed) and Science Direct database covering the period from 1985 to 2014, to find out efficient ways to accomplish canine retraction. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), prospective and retrospective controlled studies, and clinical trials were included. Two reviewers selected and extracted the data independently and assessed the quality of the retrieved studies. The search strategy resulted in 324 articles, of which 22 met the inclusion criteria. Due to the vast heterogeneity in study methods, the scientific evidence was too weak to evaluate retraction efficiency during space closure. The data so far reviewed proved that elastomeric power chains, elastic threads, magnets, NiTi coil springs, corticotomies, distraction osteogenesis, and laser therapy, all are able to provide optimum rate of tooth movements. All the methods were nearly similar to each other for retraction of canines Most of the techniques lead to anchorage loss in various amounts depending on the methods used. Most of the studies had serious problems with small sample size, confounding factors, lack of method error analysis, and no blinding in measurements. To obtain reliable scientific evidence, controlled RCT's with sufficient sample sizes are needed to determine which method/technique is the most effective in the respective retraction situation. Further studies should also consider patient acceptance and cost analysis as well as implants and minor surgeries for canine retraction.

Citing Articles

Root Resorption and Alveolar Bone Changes in the Maxillary Canine Retraction Using NiTi Closed-Coil Springs Versus Elastomeric Chains: A Split-Mouth Trial.

Le L, Ma H, Do T, Le K J Int Soc Prev Community Dent. 2024; 14(4):339-348.

PMID: 39380927 PMC: 11458088. DOI: 10.4103/jispcd.jispcd_5_24.


Patient-reported outcomes during accelerating the en-masse retraction of the upper anterior teeth using low-intensity electrical stimulation: a randomized controlled trial.

Shaadouh R, Hajeer M, Mahmoud G, Almasri I, Jaber S, Alam M Prog Orthod. 2024; 25(1):17.

PMID: 38735912 PMC: 11089026. DOI: 10.1186/s40510-024-00517-3.


Effectiveness of a low-intensity static magnetic field in accelerating upper canine retraction: a randomized controlled clinical trial.

Alqaisi N, Haddad R, Amasha H BMC Oral Health. 2024; 24(1):424.

PMID: 38582881 PMC: 10998372. DOI: 10.1186/s12903-024-04212-x.


Implant-supported canine retraction using different reactivation intervals of elastomeric chains: A CBCT-based split-mouth randomized controlled trial.

Elsayed H, El-Beialy A, Alshazly R, Almohammad A, Elazab K, El-Badawy R Dental Press J Orthod. 2023; 28(5):e2321166.

PMID: 37937679 PMC: 10627421. DOI: 10.1590/2177-6709.28.5.e2123166.oar.


Evaluation of maxillary canine and molar movement during the first phase of extraction space closure: a multilevel analysis.

Gandini Junior L, Schneider P, Kim K, Monini A, Jacob H Dental Press J Orthod. 2023; 28(4):e232338.

PMID: 37729287 PMC: 10508051. DOI: 10.1590/2177-6709.28.4.e232338.oar.


References
1.
Shpack N, Davidovitch M, Sarne O, Panayi N, Vardimon A . Duration and anchorage management of canine retraction with bodily versus tipping mechanics. Angle Orthod. 2008; 78(1):95-100. DOI: 10.2319/011707-24.1. View

2.
Kharkar V, Kotrashetti S . Transport dentoalveolar distraction osteogenesis-assisted rapid orthodontic canine retraction. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2010; 109(5):687-93. DOI: 10.1016/j.tripleo.2009.10.014. View

3.
Aboul-Ela S, El-Beialy A, Fawzy El-Sayed K, Nassef Selim E, El-Mangoury N, Mostafa Y . Miniscrew implant-supported maxillary canine retraction with and without corticotomy-facilitated orthodontics. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2011; 139(2):252-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2009.04.028. View

4.
Janson G, Busato M, Henriques J, de Freitas M, Andrade de Freitas L . Alignment stability in Class II malocclusion treated with 2- and 4-premolar extraction protocols. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2006; 130(2):189-95. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2004.11.037. View

5.
Youssef M, Ashkar S, Hamade E, Gutknecht N, Lampert F, Mir M . The effect of low-level laser therapy during orthodontic movement: a preliminary study. Lasers Med Sci. 2007; 23(1):27-33. DOI: 10.1007/s10103-007-0449-7. View