Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2010 Oct;32(5):505-13.
doi: 10.1093/ejo/cjp167. Epub 2010 May 9.

Effects of the zygoma anchorage system on canine retraction

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Effects of the zygoma anchorage system on canine retraction

Alev Cetinsahin et al. Eur J Orthod. 2010 Oct.

Abstract

The aim of this study was to compare the effects of the Gjessing (PG) retraction spring used with and without the zygoma anchorage system (ZAS) on canine retraction. Thirty patients, with an Angle Class I or Class II malocclusion, whose upper first premolars were scheduled for extraction, were divided into two equal groups. Group 1 comprised maximum anchorage cases (nine females and six males with a mean age of 16 years 8 months) in which the ZAS was used to improve posterior anchorage and the PG retraction springs for canine retraction. Moderate anchorage cases (10 females and 5 males with a mean age of 15 years 5 month) were included in group 2 and canine retraction was achieved using only PG retraction springs. Study models and lateral cephalometric radiographs obtained at the initial and final stages of canine retraction were used for comparison of the groups to determine the effects of zygoma anchorage on canine retraction. All measurements were evaluated statistically using a Student's t-test, 2 × 2 repeated measures analysis of variance, Bonferroni-adjusted t-test, and Mann-Whitney U and Wilcoxon tests according to the normality of the distribution of the variables. Mesial crown movement of the molars was 0.63 mm (P < 0.05) in group 1 and 1.50 mm (P < 0.001) in group 2. There was a statistically significant difference (P < 0.05) between the groups. No significant difference was observed between the groups for the rate of canine retraction or sagittal and vertical movement of the canines. The ZAS is a reliable and successful anchorage reinforcement method for canine retraction in extraction cases.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources