الفهرس 
AcknowledgementOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 232 |  |  |
| | | from | 232 | | |
Abstract
Introduction: The purpose of this split-mouth Randomized Controlled Trial that was to compare between corticotomy and corticision on the rate of tooth movement in a canine retraction model.
Methods: Ten patients (17-30 years old) who required fixed orthodontic treatment and maxillary first premolar extractions with subsequent canine retraction participated in this trial. The randomly allocated 1st premolar was then extracted and corticotomy procedure was carried out. Two weeks later, the contra-lateral upper first premolar was extracted, and the corticision procedure was performed. Bilateral canine retraction was then commenced after each procedure, using closed-coil nickel-titanium springs delivering 150 gm of force. Incremental rate of canine retraction was assessed every two weeks, through sequential digital models (T0-T5). CBCT was made before the two interventions were performed at the end of the follow-up period. CBCT images were used to evaluate the total distance traveled by the maxillary canine, 1st molar anchorage loss, tipping, torque and rotation of upper canine and 1st molar and finally canine root resorption. Pain was evaluated using verbal rating scale.
Results: The rate of canine retraction recorded at each month follow up period showed statistical non-significant difference on both interventions except in the first month favoring corticotomy. The total distance travelled by the canine after five months was 5.11mm in the corticotomy side and 4.79mm in the corticision side with insignificant difference between both interventions. The remaining studied variables exhibited no differences between both sides.
Conclusions: The effects of corticision procedure are comparable to the effects of corticotomy, with the added advantage of being less invasive.