Edition V17N03 | Year 2012 | Editorial Original Article | Pages 83 to 87
Objective: To mechanically evaluate different systems used for canine retraction. Methods: Three different methods for partial canine retraction were evaluated: retraction with elastic chain directly attached to bracket; elastic chain connected to bracket hook and with sliding jig activated with the aid of an elastic chain attached to a mini-implant. For this evaluation, a Typodont was adapted to simulate the desired movements when exposed to a heat source. After obtaining the measurements of the movements, statistical analysis was performed. Results: The mini-implant/sliding jig system (Groups M 0.018-in and M 0.019 x 0.026-in) favored less extrusion and distal inclination of the canines in the retraction stage (p < 0.005). Meanwhile, the retraction system with elastic chain directly attached to the orthodontic brackets (Groups C 0.018-in and 0.019 x 0.026-in) favored greater inclination and extrusion than the others, followed by the system of elastic chain attached to the hook (Groups G 0.018-in and 0.019 x 0.026-in). Conclusions: Canine retraction with the mini-implant/sliding jig system showed the best mechanical control. The worst results were observed with a 0.018 archwire when the elastic chain was attached to the bracket.
Corrective Orthodontics, Canine tooth, Malocclusion,