Active clinical trials for "Malocclusion"

The duration of orthodontic treatment is one of the exacerbation causes of orthodontic pain. Several methods have been suggested to reduce the duration of orthodontic treatment classified to surgical and non-surgical methods. Researches used minimally invasive surgical methods like corticision, piezocesion, disicion, micro-osteoperforation, and piezopuncture indicated that most of these methods can accelerate dental movement by 20 - 40% without causing additional pain as a result of using those methods. Applying corticision on the lower anterior teeth using a surgical blade and a hammer may accelerate tooth alignment during orthodontic treatment. This study consists of two groups, patients will be randomly assigned to one of these two groups.

This study evaluates the effects of a finishing protocol in orthodontic outcomes using ABO-OGS scores. Patients who finish orthodontic treatment and fulfill the inclusion and exclusion criteria receive a treatment using a finishing protocol and their scores are compare with 40 patients who don't receive a finishing protocol

Class II malocclusion (mismatch between the upper and lower jaw in which the lower jaw appears to be smaller from a profile point of view) are common in the general population. Around 1/3 of the population have some degree of this skeletal/dental problem and it is one frequent reason why patients decide to undergo orthodontic treatment. Treatment alternatives will basically depend on the facial skeletal development of the patient and also on the magnitude of the skeletal/dental discrepancy. For patients that are not yet fully skeletal mature, the treatment of mild to moderate Class II malocclusion involves a combination of a small skeletal growth modification effect and more significant dental movements. For skeletal mature individuals with a severe mismatch, the treatment usually involves jaw surgery to fully correct the malocclusion. For less severe cases orthodontic camouflage exclusively done by orthodontic movements is an option. If the case is not severe enough to warrant a surgical approach there are several treatment alternatives. One of the most commonly used options is the use of orthodontic loaded springs that apply forces through brackets and arch wires bonded into the teeth so that the teeth will interrelate better. A different alternative was proposed some years ago. The Xbow (spelled Crossbow) appliance differs from the above-proposed option in that no brackets are bonded or arch wires used. The orthodontic springs are applied to a metal framework cemented on some upper and lower teeth. Once the skeletal/dental problem is believed to have been significantly improved, fine tuning of the remaining dental problems is managed with brackets and arch wires. The theoretical advantage of such a design is that adverse effects, such as root resorption and decalcification from the long-term use of brackets and arch wires, are theoretically minimized as the brackets and arch wires have to be used for a shorter period of time. Although there are some retrospective reports about the skeletal and dental effects of the Xbow appliance and only one prospective trial comparing the skeletal and dental changes to a non-treated growing sample; no randomized clinical trial has yet evaluated the changes compared to a current standard of care alternative which is the simultaneous use of loaded springs concurrent with brackets and arch wires.

The aim of the current controlled trial was to assess the possible net skeletal and dental effects of FLMGM treatment in relation to growth with emphasis on the contribution of skeletal and dental changes to sagittal correction of Cl II/1 malocclusion. The null hypothesis stated that there were no significant differences in dentoskeletal changes between FLMGM treated group and control untreated group.

Forty patients with class II division 1 malocclusion who will require extraction of the upper first premolars as a part of the orthodontic treatment plan will be invited to participate in the study. They will be divided randomly into two groups: the electrical group and the control group. The en-masse retraction technique will be used to retract the upper anterior teeth using mini-implants as an anchor unit to provide the maximum anchorage and Nickle-Titanium closed coil springs that will be stretched from the mini-implants to the crimpable hooks on the base wire and applied 250 g of force per side. A special removable electrical device will be used to provide electrical stimulation during the retraction phase. The levels of pain and discomfort will be self-reported using a questionnaire with visual analog scales.

the objective of the current study is to compare the dentofacial effects of the mini-plate anchored Herbst appliance Versus the dentally anchored Twin force bite corrector Appliance in Young Adult Class II Orthodontic Patients with retruded mandible.

This study will aim to evaluate the effect of skeletally anchored extrusion arch on the dentofacial structures in patients with anterior open bite (AOB).

Patients at the Orthodontic Department of the University of Damascus Dental School will be examined and subjects who meet the inclusion criteria will be included. Then, initial diagnostic records (diagnostic gypsum models, internal and external oral photographs, and radiographic images) will be studied to ensure that the selection criteria are accurately matched. This study aims to compare two groups of patients with moderate crowding of the lower anterior teeth. Experimental group: the patients in this group will be treated with periodontally accelerated osteogenic orthodontics Control group: the patients in this group will be treated using fixed appliances without any acceleration method.

The different types of brackets (e.g., self-ligating and conventional brackets), and the various acceleration methods (e.g., corticotomy) cause varying degrees of pain and discomfort. This study will assess pain, discomfort, and other patient-centered outcomes in adults with severe crowding on the upper jaw requiring two first premolars extraction. There are three groups: The first group (control group): the patients in this group will be treated using conventional brackets alone. The second group (Experimental group): the patients in this group will be treated using self-ligating brackets alone. The third group (Experimental group): the patients in this group will be treated using self-ligating brackets associated with flapless corticotomy.

58 patients who need extraction-based treatment of the maxillary first premolars with subsequent retraction of the maxillary canines will be divided randomly into three groups in this trial. The prolonged duration of the treatment period can cause many side effects such as white spots, caries, periodontal diseases, and pain and discomfort. So many efforts have been made to reduce the treatment time. Many procedures have been introduced to accelerate orthodontic tooth movement, which can category as surgical or non-surgical. Piezocision is a minimally invasive surgical method for accelerating orthodontic tooth movement and shortening treatment time. Low-level laser therapy (LLLT) is one of the physical acceleration methods that have contributed to decreasing treatment time. There are three groups: The first group (control group): the canine retraction in this group will be performed in conventional method. The second group (Experimental group): the canine retraction in this group will be performed in association with piezocision. The third group (Experimental group): the canine retraction in this group will be performed in association with low-level laser therapy.