World Journal of Dentistry

Register      Login

SEARCH WITHIN CONTENT

FIND ARTICLE

Volume / Issue

Online First

Archive
Volume  15 (2024)
Volume  14 (2023)
Volume  13 (2022)
Volume  12 (2021)
Volume  11 (2020)
Volume  10 (2019)
Volume  9 (2018)
Volume  8 (2017)
Volume  7 (2016)
Volume  6 (2015)
Volume  5 (2014)
Volume  4 (2013)
Volume  3 (2012)
Volume  2 (2011)
Volume  1 (2010)
Related articles

VOLUME 12 , ISSUE 6 ( November-December, 2021 ) > List of Articles

ORIGINAL RESEARCH

Comparison of Mini-implant-supported Mandibular Canine Retraction with and without Submucosal Injection of Platelet-rich Plasma: A Split-mouth Study

Nithin V Joy, Hurkadle Jyothikiran, Nagasundar Rao Raghunath

Keywords : Accelerated orthodontics, Canine retraction, Mini-implant-supported retraction, Orthodontic tooth movement, Platelet-rich plasma, Split-mouth study

Citation Information : Joy NV, Jyothikiran H, Raghunath NR. Comparison of Mini-implant-supported Mandibular Canine Retraction with and without Submucosal Injection of Platelet-rich Plasma: A Split-mouth Study. World J Dent 2021; 12 (6):446-452.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10015-1878

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 24-11-2021

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2021; The Author(s).


Abstract

Aim and objective: To compare the differences in the rate of implant-supported individual canine retraction, with and without the administration of autologous platelet-rich plasma (PRP). Materials and methods: Fifteen individuals who required mandibular 1st premolar extractions as part of their orthodontic therapy were selected in this split-mouth study. After the initial case strap-up followed by alignment and leveling stage using MBT 0.022″ appliance, to evaluate the effect of PRP on orthodontic tooth movement, the individual canine retraction was carried out on both the intervention and control side using the same NiTi Closed Coil Springs using a retraction force magnitude of 150 g measured using a Dontrix gauge. In the present study, instead of taking the conventional molar anchorage for retraction, mini-implants were utilized to prevent any mesial movement of posterior teeth (anchor loss). At the same appointment, injectable PRP was derived from the patient's own blood and was administered submucosally in the lingual mucosa and attached gingiva of canine and extraction site of the first premolar on the intervention side. Measurements for the determination of the rate of canine retraction were performed by direct technique from pre-canine retraction (T0) and post-canine retraction (T1) dental models with the help of a Vernier caliper digital instrument. The rate of canine retraction was evaluated and put through statistical analysis. Results: The mean rate of canine retraction for the PRP group and control group was 0.87 ± 0.12 and 0.7 ± 0.13 mm/month, respectively. The paired difference in the rates of the canine retraction was 0.17067 mm/month, which was found to be statistically significant (p < 0.001). Conclusion: The individual canine retraction was observed to be 1.24 times efficient in the PRP group compared with the control group. The effect of PRP administration on the rate of tooth movement at different intervals of the canine retraction process needs to be evaluated in future studies. Clinical significance: Minimally invasive techniques to speed up orthodontic treatment are the need of the hour as more individuals wish for a shorter duration of orthodontic therapy as well as not ignoring the positive effects of the same with respect to periodontal health, dental caries, and patient compliance.

HTML PDF Share
  1. Liou EJ. The development of submucosal injection of platelet rich plasma for accelerating orthodontic tooth movement and preserving pressure side alveolar bone. APOS Trends Orthod 2016;6(1):5–11. DOI: 10.4103/2321-1407.173725.
  2. Guo L, Feng Y, Guo HG, et al. Consequences of orthodontic treatment in malocclusion patients: clinical and microbial effects in adults and children. BMC Oral Health 2016;16(1):1–7. DOI: 10.1186/s12903-016-0308-7.
  3. Tsichlaki A, Chin SY, Pandis N, et al. How long does treatment with fixed orthodontic appliances last? a systematic review. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2016;149(3):308–318. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2015.09.020.
  4. Uribe F, Padala S, Allareddy V, et al. Patients’, parents’, and orthodontists’ perceptions of the need for and costs of additional procedures to reduce treatment time. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2014;145(4):S65–S73. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2013.12.015.
  5. Wilcko MT, Wilcko WM, Bissada NF. An evidence-based analysis of periodontally accelerated orthodontic and osteogenic techniques: a synthesis of scientific perspectives. In Seminars in orthodontics, vol. 14, No. 4. WB Saunders; 2008. pp. 305–316.
  6. Frost HM. The regional acceleratory phenomenon: a review. Henry Ford Hospital Med J 1983;31(1):3–9.
  7. Marx RE, Carlson ER, Eichstaedt RM, et al. Platelet-rich plasma: growth factor enhancement for bone grafts. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endodontol 1998;85(6):638–646. DOI: 10.1016/s1079-2104(98)90029-4.
  8. Petrungaro PS. Using platelet-rich plasma to accelerate soft tissue maturation in esthetic periodontal surgery. Compend Contin Educat Dent, (Jamesburg, NJ: 1995) 2001;22(9):729–732.
  9. Ziegler P, Ingervall B. A clinical study of maxillary canine retraction with a retraction spring and with sliding mechanics. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthoped 1989;95(2):99–106. DOI: 10.1016/0889-5406(89)90388-0.
  10. Park HS, Lee YJ, Jeong SH, et al. Density of the alveolar and basal bones of the maxilla and the mandible. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2008;133(1):30–37. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.01.044.
  11. Iwasaki LR, Haack JE, Nickel JC, et al. Human tooth movement in response to continuous stress of low magnitude. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2000;117(2):175–183. DOI: 10.1016/s0889-5406(00)70229-0.
  12. da C, Monini A, Gandini LG, et al. Tooth movement rate and anchorage lost during canine retraction: a maxillary and mandibular comparison. The Angle Orthodon 2019;89(4):559–565. DOI: 10.2319/061318-443.1.
  13. Thiruvenkatachari B, Pavithranand A, Rajasigamani K, et al. Comparison and measurement of the amount of anchorage loss of the molars with and without the use of implant anchorage during canine retraction. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2006;129(4):551–554. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2005.12.014.
  14. Davis D, Krishnaraj R, Duraisamy S, et al. Comparison of rate of canine retraction and Anchorage potential between mini-implant and conventional molar anchorage: an in vivo study. Contemp Clin Dentis 2018;9(3):337. DOI: 10.4103/ccd.ccd_837_17.
  15. El-Timamy A, El Sharaby F, Eid F, et al. Effect of platelet-rich plasma on the rate of orthodontic tooth movement: a split-mouth randomized trial. Angle Orthod 2020;90(3):354–361. DOI: 10.2319/072119-483.1.
  16. Kurt G, İşeri H, Kişnişci R. Rapid tooth movement and orthodontic treatment using dentoalveolar distraction (DAD) long-term (5 years) follow-up of a class II case. Angle Orthodont 2010;80(3):597–606. DOI: 10.2319/041209-209.1.
  17. Alikhani M, Raptis M, Zoldan B, et al. Effect of micro-osteoperforations on the rate of tooth movement. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2013;144(5):639–648. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2013.06.017.
  18. Heravi F, Moradi A, Ahrari F. The effect of low level laser therapy on the rate of tooth movement and pain perception during canine retraction. Oral Health Dent Manag 2014;13(2):183–188.
  19. Rajasekaran UB, Nayak UK. Effect of prostaglandin E1 versus corticotomy on orthodontic tooth movement: an in vivo study. Indian J Dent Res 2014;25(6):717. DOI: 10.4103/0970-9290.152170.
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.