Class II Division 1 MalocclusionNCT03149016
The Use of Corticotomy for Upper Incisors Retraction
A study testing Corticotomy-assisted Retraction in people with Class II Division 1 Malocclusion, run by Damascus University at 1 site in Syria.
Trial summary
We aim to assess the treatment outcomes following upper incisors retraction accelerated by corticotomy procedure. So, we intend to randomize orthodontic patients with class II division I malocclusion into two groups: experimental group and control group. Both groups will start orthodontic treatment. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 15 to 27 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Class II Division 1 Malocclusion
- What is being tested?
- Corticotomy-assisted Retraction
- Type of treatment
- Surgery or procedure
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 30 participants
- Where
- 1 siteSyria
- Study dates
- 20 Aug 2016to 15 Apr 2018
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 15 to 27 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Child, Adult
Who may be able to join
- Adult patients 15 to 27 years , with permanent dentition , without hypodontia .
- Overjet less than 10 mm
- Normal or increased growth pattern (Diagnosed by Y-axis angle)
- Mild to moderate crowding (Less than 3 mm)
- After canines retraction , at least 3 mm space should be available distal the lateral incisors
- Midline deviation shouldn't be more than 3 mm
Who cannot join
- Medically contraindicated patients to oral surgery .
- Existence of general health issue that affect orthodontic teeth movement
- Previous orthodontic treatment
- Mixed dentition
- Hypodontia (Except third molars)
- Bad oral hygiene
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Syria1 site
Department of Orthodontics, University of Damascus Dental School
Damascus, DM20AM18
About this study
Official title: Evaluation of Treatment Outcomes of Corticotomy-accelerated Upper Incisors' Retraction: A Randomized Controlled Trial
We aim to assess the treatment outcomes following upper incisors retraction accelerated by corticotomy procedure. So, we intend to randomize orthodontic patients with class II division I malocclusion into two groups: experimental group and control group. Both groups will start orthodontic treatment. Once a 0.019*0.025-inch stainless steel wire is fully engaged to the brackets, 1st premolars will be extracted. Canines will be retracted in the conventional manner. Then, the actual evaluation period starts when the upper incisors are retracted using two different methods.
Read the detailed description
In the last three decades, the number of adult patients seeking short orthodontic treatment time has apparently increased as the conventional orthodontic treatment usually lasts for 20-24 months. Furthermore, orthodontic treatment is often associated with root resorption, bone degradation and caries development. Patients nowadays desire to end the orthodontic treatment as soon as possible due to phsycosocial reasons and to get the goals of the treatment without affecting their social life .
So many tooth movement accelerating methods have been proposed. However, the surgical approached are considered the most effective and promising methods in accelerating tooth movement. The current research aims to evaluate the efficacy of the a new proposed surgical method compared to the conventional method in upper incisors' retraction.
- Conditions
- Class II Division 1 Malocclusion
- Being tested
- Corticotomy-assisted Retraction
- Medical subject headings
- Malocclusion, Angle Class II
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Corticotomy-assisted RetractionProcedure or surgery
Using a tunneling technique, the researcher will perform the intervention in the alveolar bone surrounding the upper incisors before retraction.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Corticotomy-assisted Retraction | Experimental | Corticotomy-assisted retraction will be performed in order to help in accelerating upper incisors' retraction Receives: Procedure: Corticotomy-assisted Retraction |
| Conventional Retraction | No intervention | Conventional retraction will be used in this group of patients by sliding mechanisms |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Rate of retraction
The distance that the incisors moved during retraction divided by the time required to retract the four upper incisors to their ideal positions.
Measured: This will be measured at the completion of the retraction procedure, and is expected to take 2 months in the experimental group and four months in the control group.
Time required for retraction
The time required from the beginning of incisors' retraction till the the completion of this procedure.
Measured: This will be measured at the completion of the retraction procedure, and is expected to be within 2 months in the accelerated group and 4 months in the control group.
Secondary outcomes (3)
Change in the axial inclination of upper incisors
the angle between the long axis of the upper incisor and a reference plane drawn on a later cephalometric radiograph teken at two assessment times.
Measured: A radiograph will be taken at T1: one day before upper incisors' retraction and T2: one day after the completion of upper incisors' retraction. Completion of upper incisors' retraction is expected to be within 2 months in the accelerated group and 4 mo
Anchorage loss
the amount of anchorage loss (in mm), which is the distance from a perpendicular line to the midpalatal suture and extends between central fossa of both upper first molars to the third palatal rugae . These measurements are made on plaster study models.
Measured: This will be measured one day following the completion of retraction of the upper four incisors using plaster study models and is expected to be within 2 months in the accelerated group and 4 months in the control group
Root resorption
This variable is related to the amount of incisor root resorption after treatment in both groups. This is measured on a panoramic image. The amount of root resorption = the length of an incisor after retraction subtracted from the length of an incisor before retraction. Two radiogrpahs are needed.
Measured: An panoramic image will be taken at T1: one day before the commencement of incisor retraction and T2: one day following the completion of retraction and is expected to be within 2 months in the accelerated group and 4 months in the control group
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted11 May 2017
- Study start20 Aug 2016
- Primary completion20 Jan 2018
- Study completion15 Apr 2018
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (7)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Class II Division 1 MalocclusionStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 30 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Damascus University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Ghaith Al Imam, DDS, Principal investigator, MSc student in Orthodontics, University of Damascus Dental School, Damascus, Syria
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03149016
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- UDDS-Ortho-02-2017
- Status last verified
- Jul 2018
- First submitted
- 9 May 2017
- Last updated
- 30 Jul 2018
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Aboul-Ela SM, El-Beialy AR, El-Sayed KM, Selim EM, El-Mangoury NH, Mostafa YA. Miniscrew implant-supported maxillary canine retraction with and without corticotomy-facilitated orthodontics. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2011 Feb;139(2):252-9. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2009.04.028.
PubMed 21300255Al-Naoum F, Hajeer MY, Al-Jundi A. Does alveolar corticotomy accelerate orthodontic tooth movement when retracting upper canines? A split-mouth design randomized controlled trial. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2014 Oct;72(10):1880-9. doi: 10.1016/j.joms.2014.05.003. Epub 2014 May 14.
PubMed 25128922Choo H, Heo HA, Yoon HJ, Chung KR, Kim SH. Treatment outcome analysis of speedy surgical orthodontics for adults with maxillary protrusion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2011 Dec;140(6):e251-62. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2011.06.029.
PubMed 22133959Chung KR, Kim SH, Lee BS. Speedy surgical-orthodontic treatment with temporary anchorage devices as an alternative to orthognathic surgery. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2009 Jun;135(6):787-98. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2007.03.036.
PubMed 19524840Bhattacharya P, Bhattacharya H, Anjum A, Bhandari R, Agarwal DK, Gupta A, Ansar J. Assessment of Corticotomy Facilitated Tooth Movement and Changes in Alveolar Bone Thickness - A CT Scan Study. J Clin Diagn Res. 2014 Oct;8(10):ZC26-30. doi: 10.7860/JCDR/2014/9448.4954. Epub 2014 Oct 20.
PubMed 25478442Dincer M, Gulsen A, Turk T. The retraction of upper incisors with the PG retraction system. Eur J Orthod. 2000 Feb;22(1):33-41. doi: 10.1093/ejo/22.1.33.
PubMed 10721243KOLE H. Surgical operations on the alveolar ridge to correct occlusal abnormalities. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1959 May;12(5):515-29 concl. doi: 10.1016/0030-4220(59)90153-7. No abstract available.
PubMed 13644913
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 30 Jul 2018. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Evaluation of Treatment Outcomes of Corticotomy-accelerated Upper Incisors' Retraction: A Randomized Controlled Trial
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03149016
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- UDDS-Ortho-02-2017
- Conditions
- Class II Division 1 Malocclusion
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 30 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Damascus UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 20 Aug 2016 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 20 Jan 2018 (actual)
- Study completion
- 15 Apr 2018 (actual)
- First posted
- 11 May 2017 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
We aim to assess the treatment outcomes following upper incisors retraction accelerated by corticotomy procedure. So, we intend to randomize orthodontic patients with class II division I malocclusion into two groups: experimental group and control group. Both groups will start orthodontic treatment. Once a 0.019*0.025-inch stainless steel wire is fully engaged to the brackets, 1st premolars will be extracted. Canines will be retracted in the conventional manner. Then, the actual evaluation period starts when the upper incisors are retracted using two different methods.
Detailed description
In the last three decades, the number of adult patients seeking short orthodontic treatment time has apparently increased as the conventional orthodontic treatment usually lasts for 20-24 months. Furthermore, orthodontic treatment is often associated with root resorption, bone degradation and caries development. Patients nowadays desire to end the orthodontic treatment as soon as possible due to phsycosocial reasons and to get the goals of the treatment without affecting their social life .
So many tooth movement accelerating methods have been proposed. However, the surgical approached are considered the most effective and promising methods in accelerating tooth movement. The current research aims to evaluate the efficacy of the a new proposed surgical method compared to the conventional method in upper incisors' retraction.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Corticotomy-assisted Retraction | Experimental | Procedure: Corticotomy-assisted RetractionCorticotomy-assisted retraction will be performed in order to help in accelerating upper incisors' retraction |
| Conventional Retraction | No intervention | –Conventional retraction will be used in this group of patients by sliding mechanisms |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 15 to 27 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult
Key inclusion criteria (6 listed)
- Adult patients 15 to 27 years , with permanent dentition , without hypodontia .
- Overjet less than 10 mm
- Normal or increased growth pattern (Diagnosed by Y-axis angle)
- Mild to moderate crowding (Less than 3 mm)
- After canines retraction , at least 3 mm space should be available distal the lateral incisors
Key exclusion criteria (6 listed)
- Medically contraindicated patients to oral surgery .
- Existence of general health issue that affect orthodontic teeth movement
- Previous orthodontic treatment
- Mixed dentition
- Hypodontia (Except third molars)
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Corticotomy-assisted RetractionUsing a tunneling technique, the researcher will perform the intervention in the alveolar bone surrounding the upper incisors before retraction. | Procedure or surgery | Corticotomy-assisted Retraction |
Primary outcome
Rate of retraction
Time frame: This will be measured at the completion of the retraction procedure, and is expected to take 2 months in the experimental group and four months in the control group.
The distance that the incisors moved during retraction divided by the time required to retract the four upper incisors to their ideal positions.
Time required for retraction
Time frame: This will be measured at the completion of the retraction procedure, and is expected to be within 2 months in the accelerated group and 4 months in the control group.
The time required from the beginning of incisors' retraction till the the completion of this procedure.
3 secondary outcomes
Change in the axial inclination of upper incisors
Time frame: A radiograph will be taken at T1: one day before upper incisors' retraction and T2: one day after the completion of upper incisors' retraction. Completion of upper incisors' retraction is expected to be within 2 months in the accelerated group and 4 mo
Anchorage loss
Time frame: This will be measured one day following the completion of retraction of the upper four incisors using plaster study models and is expected to be within 2 months in the accelerated group and 4 months in the control group
Root resorption
Time frame: An panoramic image will be taken at T1: one day before the commencement of incisor retraction and T2: one day following the completion of retraction and is expected to be within 2 months in the accelerated group and 4 months in the control group
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 30 Jul 2018.
- Background: PubMed 21300255Aboul-Ela SM, El-Beialy AR, El-Sayed KM, Selim EM, El-Mangoury NH, Mostafa YA. Miniscrew implant-supported maxillary canine retraction with and without corticotomy-facilitated orthodontics. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2011 Feb;139(2):252-9. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2009.04.028.
- Background: PubMed 25128922Al-Naoum F, Hajeer MY, Al-Jundi A. Does alveolar corticotomy accelerate orthodontic tooth movement when retracting upper canines? A split-mouth design randomized controlled trial. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2014 Oct;72(10):1880-9. doi: 10.1016/j.joms.2014.05.003. Epub 2014 May 14.
- Background: PubMed 22133959Choo H, Heo HA, Yoon HJ, Chung KR, Kim SH. Treatment outcome analysis of speedy surgical orthodontics for adults with maxillary protrusion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2011 Dec;140(6):e251-62. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2011.06.029.
- Background: PubMed 19524840Chung KR, Kim SH, Lee BS. Speedy surgical-orthodontic treatment with temporary anchorage devices as an alternative to orthognathic surgery. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2009 Jun;135(6):787-98. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2007.03.036.
- Background: PubMed 25478442Bhattacharya P, Bhattacharya H, Anjum A, Bhandari R, Agarwal DK, Gupta A, Ansar J. Assessment of Corticotomy Facilitated Tooth Movement and Changes in Alveolar Bone Thickness - A CT Scan Study. J Clin Diagn Res. 2014 Oct;8(10):ZC26-30. doi: 10.7860/JCDR/2014/9448.4954. Epub 2014 Oct 20.
- Background: PubMed 10721243Dincer M, Gulsen A, Turk T. The retraction of upper incisors with the PG retraction system. Eur J Orthod. 2000 Feb;22(1):33-41. doi: 10.1093/ejo/22.1.33.
- Background: PubMed 13644913KOLE H. Surgical operations on the alveolar ridge to correct occlusal abnormalities. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1959 May;12(5):515-29 concl. doi: 10.1016/0030-4220(59)90153-7. No abstract available.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Class II Division 1 Malocclusion
Enrolling by invitation
Discision as Acceleration Method in Canine Retraction in Orthodontics With Aligner and Fixed Appliances in Young Adults a Split Mouth Study
Bimaxillary Protrusion, Class II Div 1 Malocclusion
Recruiting
Twin-Block and LIPUS for TMJ Outcomes in Skeletal Class II Patients
CLASS II DIVISION 1 MALOCCLUSION
Recruiting
LLLLT vs Piezocision in Accelerating Orthodontic Canine Retraction
Malocclusion, Angle Class II, Division 1, Bimaxillary Protrusion
Recruiting
EVALUATION OF TREATMENT CHANGES IN CLASS II DIVISION 1 MALOCCLUSION DURING EN MASSE RETRACTION OF UPPER ANTERIOR TEETH USING MINI IMPLANTS PLACED AT INFRAZYGOMATIC CREST AND INTERRADICULAR SITES A RANDOMIZED CLINICAL TRIAL.
CLASS II DIVISION 1 MALOCCLUSION
Not yet recruiting
Comparison of Early Interceptive Orthodontic Appliances (Traditional and Novel) and Later Fixed Appliance Treatment in Class II Malocclusion.
Class II Malocclusion, Class II Malocclusion, Division 1
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Ghaith Al Imam, DDS principal investigator
MSc student in Orthodontics, University of Damascus Dental School, Damascus, Syria
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Corticotomy-assisted Retraction in people with Class II Division 1 Malocclusion, run by Damascus University at 1 site in Syria.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 6 inclusion and 6 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 30 Jul 2018. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Syria. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Rate of retraction (time frame: This will be measured at the completion of the retraction procedure, and is expected to take 2 months in the experimental group and four months in the control group.). The study lists 2 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT03149016, which also lists 7 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 30 Jul 2018.