Document Type : Original Article
Authors
1
Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dental Medicine (Boys), Al-Azhar University, Cairo, Egypt
2
Postgraduate MSc Student, Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dental Medicine (Boys), Al-Azhar University, Cairo, Egypt
3
Lecturer, Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dental Medicine (Boys), Al-Azhar University, Cairo, Egypt.
4
Professor, Department of Oral Medicine & Diagnosis & Radiology, Faculty of Dental Medicine (Boys), Al-Azhar University, Cairo, Egypt
Abstract
Objective: This study aimed to determine whether orthodontically moved maxillary canines exposed to two different protocols and dosage of LLLT exhibited differences in amount and rate of tooth movement.
Materials and Methods: Fifteen patients, 12 females and 3males, with mean age of 17.48 ± 2.95 years were included. They had a clinical indication for bilateral extraction of first maxillary premolars. Using a split mouth design, maxillary left and right sides were randomly divided into two groups. In group 1, LLLT delivered at 10 points; 5 from buccal and 5 from palatal aspects with total dose of 8 J/session. In group II, laser applied from buccal side only at 5 points with dose of 4 J per session. In both protocols, gallium aluminum-arsenide diode laser applied in continuous mode with 635 nm, 100 mW, 25 J/cm2, 8 seconds/ point, 0.8 J/point. Amount and rate of maxillary canine retraction and degree of anchorage loss were determined by intraoral and three-dimensional digital models measurements.
Results: Clinical and model evaluations demonstrated no significant difference (p˃ 0.05) between both groups. After 24 weeks, total amounts of canine retraction were 6.86±1.60 mm and 6.65±1.59 mm in group I and group II, respectively. Moreover, anchorage loss displayed -0.35 mm ± 0.18 mm in group I and -0.44 mm± 0.24 mm in group II.
Conclusion: With the current settings, both protocols and energy doses of LLLT accomplished comparable amount and rate of maxillary canine retraction. Additionally, they displayed an equivalent minimal degree of anchorage loss.
Keywords
)
View on SCiNiTO