COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Comparison of in-vivo failure of single-thread and dual-thread temporary anchorage devices over 18 months: A split-mouth randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to compare the in-vivo failure rates of single-thread and dual-thread temporary anchorage device (TAD) designs over 18 months.

METHODS: Thirty patients with skeletal Class II Division 1 malocclusion requiring anchorage from TADs for retraction of maxillary incisors into the extracted premolar space were recruited in this parallel group, split-mouth, randomized controlled trial. A block randomization sequence was generated with Random Allocation Software (version 2.0; Isfahan, Iran) with the allocations concealed in sequentially numbered, opaque, sealed envelopes. A total of 60 TADs (diameter, 2 mm; length, 10 mm) were placed in the maxillary arches of these patients with random allocation of the 2 types to the left and the right sides in a 1:1 ratio. All TADs were placed between the roots of the second premolar and the first molar and were immediately loaded. Patients were followed for a minimum of 12 months and a maximum of 18 months for the failure of the TADs. Data were analyzed blindly on an intention-to-treat basis.

RESULTS: Four TADs (13.3%) failed in the single-thread group, and 6 TADs (20%) failed in the dual-thread group. The McNemar test showed an insignificant difference (P = 0.72) between the 2 groups. An odds ratio of 1.6 (95% confidence interval, 0.39-6.97) showed no significant associations among the variables. Most TADs failed in the first month after insertion (50%).

CONCLUSIONS: The failure rate of dual-thread TADs compared with single-thread TADs is statistically insignificant when placed in the maxilla for retraction of the anterior segment. Registration: The trial was not registered before commencement.

PROTOCOL: The protocol was not published before the trial.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app