Admin Dental Press

Edition V24N05 | Year 2019 | Editorial Highlights | Pages 17 to 19

Matheus Melo Pithon

We work in a dual state where we want a higher movement rate during active orthodontic treatment and no movement in the orthodontic retention phase; however, in many clinical situations, what we want occurs in reverse. Much has been reported about accelerating orthodontic movement using drugs, corticotomies or osteoperforations, among other treatments. But to reduce the movement rate, which device to use? In specific situations, where the focus is on a particular tooth, either as an anchor Contact address: Matheus Melo Pithon Av. Otávio Santos, 395, sala 705 – Vitória da Conquista/BA – Brasil CEP: 45.020-750 – E-mail: matheuspithon@gmail.com 1Universidade Estadual do Sudoeste da Bahia, Disciplina de Ortodontia (Jequié/ BA, Brazil). 2Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Programa de Pós-Graduação em Odontopediatria e Ortodontia (Rio de Janeiro/RJ, Brazil). Submitted: June 01, 2019 – Revised and accepted: August 07, 2019 Figure 1 – Images showing the local administration of simvastatin via submucosal (A) and intraligament (B) injections. Source: AlSwafeeri et al.1 A , 2019. B feature during active treatment or in the retention phase, what to do? Seeking answers to these questions, Egyptian researchers developed a study1 that investigated the effects of the local administration of simvastatin on the magnitude of orthodontic tooth movement and alveolar bone modeling in rats (Fig 1) whose teeth were moved, in association with the local administration of this drug. The use of simvastatin reduced the rate and magnitude of orthodontic tooth movement as a result of a decrease in the bone resorption processes associated with orthodontic tooth movement, thereby reducing the number of osteoclasts.

Related articles