Article | Material: Size, Gender, Age (Years), Dropout | Drug Used | Dose and Method of Administration | Methods of Force Application |
Method of Measurement of GCF/Tooth Movement | Observation Time/Follow-up Time | Impact of Medication on Tooth Movement | Outcome/Author’s Conclusion |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Sari et al., 2004 [26] |
• N=36 patients (18 males/18 females) • Mean age: 17.6 • No Drop out |
Acetylsalicylic acid vs rofecoxib | • Group 1 received acetylsalicylic acid, 500 mg 3 times daily for 2 days (activation) • Group 2 received rofecoxib 25 mg on the day of activation and 12.5 mg on the next day • Group3 (control) |
72 maxillary canine teeth were distalized with 120g of force delivered by NiTi closed-coil springs | GCF was obtained at baseline and after the activation of closed-coil springs at (1, 2, and 7 days) using 4 filter papers |
• Observation time was 7 days • Follow up was not clear |
A statistically significant decrease in PGE2 levels in acetylsalicylic acid group at 24 hours unlike rofecoxib which was similar to control group |
Rofecoxib can be used during orthodontic treatment without altering tooth movement |
Shetty et al., 2013 [27] |
• N=42 patients • Mean age: 18 • No drop out |
Ibuprofen and acetaminophen | • Group 1 received 400 mg of ibuprofen 3 times per day for 2 days • Group 2 received 500mg acetaminophen three times a day for 2 days • Group3 (control) |
The maxillary canines were distalized with 150g of force delivered by NiTi coil springs | GCF sampling was done at baseline and after the activation of the springs at 24, 48 and 168h using micropipette | • 7 days Observation time • Follow up was not clear |
The PGE2 levels in the 1st group at 24 and 48 h were significantly less when compared to the acetaminophen and control groups | Ibuprofen inhibits PGE2 synthesis more than acetaminophen |
Karadeniz et al., 2011 [28] | • N=48 patients (23 males, 25 females) • Mean age: 15.27 • No drop out |
Fluoride | • Group 1 high fluoride-heavy force • Group 2 low fluoride-heavy force • Group 3 high fluoride-light force • Group 4 low fluoride-light force *Low fluoride concentration areas=0.05 ppm *high fluoride concentration areas=2 ppm respectively |
The patients’ maxillary first premolars were exposed to either heavy (225g) or light (25g) forces were applied using Beta-titanium cantilever springs | 2D and 3D evaluation of scanned casts taken before and 4 weeks after activation were superimposed to measure the amount of movement at the buccal and lingual cusps | • 4 weeks treatment period • Follow up was not clear |
2D analysis: G1HH:1.60mm G2LH: 1.33mm G3HL: 1.25mm G4LL: 1.02mm 3D analysis: G1HH: 1.61mm G2LH: 1.31mm G3HL: 1.15mm G4LL: 1.06mm |
• Fluoride and heavy forces both increase tooth movement. • Two- and three-dimensional methods were accurate for the assessment of tooth movement after four weeks of buccal tipping force application when the palatal rugae were used for superimposition |
Yamasaki et al., 1984 [24] (1st phase) |
• N=9 cases (1 male, 8 females) • Mean age: 11.73 • No drop out |
Prostaglandin E1 |
• 10 μg PGE1 was injected in the submucosal area of the buccal side of the maxillary first premolar in the experimental side • A vehicle was injected to the control side |
Two double springs were adjusted to the right and left maxillary first premolars with 100 g of force in the buccal direction | Tooth movement was recorded by measuring the distances of the first premolars from the lingual arches | • Treatment time was 35 days • Follow up was not clear |
• Prostaglandin to control group ratio was 2.14: 1 • Average tooth movement on the PGE1 side 3.02mm |
• Movement of the experimental side was almost doubled with a ratio of 2.14:1 ratio • No side effects except for slight pain in the first day on both sides |
Yamasaki et al., 1984 [24] (2nd phase) |
• N=8 cases (2 males, 6 females) • Mean age: 12.55 • No drop out |
Prostaglandin E1 |
• 10 μg PGE1 was injected in the submucosal area of the distal side of the canine in the experimental side over 2 weeks • A vehicle was injected to the control side |
Maxillary and Mandibular canines of both sides were distalized with sectional contraction loops archwire using 150g of force | Distal canine movement was considered as the decrease of the distance between the canine and the anchor molars | • 3 weeks treatment time • Follow up was not clear |
The treated side showed greater velocity of tooth movement than the untreated side. | • In some cases, tooth movement in the experimental side was doubled • No side effects were observed in the PGE1 injected area |
Yamasaki et al., 1984 [24] (3rd phase) |
• N=8 cases (2 males, 6 females) • Mean age: 18.55 • No drop out |
Prostaglandin E1 |
• 10 μg PGE1 was injected in the submucosal area of the distal side of the canine in the experimental side over 10 days • A vehicle was injected to the control side |
The maxillary canines were distalized with compressed open-coil springs or ringlets using 150g force | Distal canine movement was considered as the decrease of the distance between the canine and the anchor molars | • 10 days treatment period. • Follow up was not clear |
• Prostaglandin to control group ratio was 1.61: 1 • Average tooth movement on the PGE1 side 2.07mm |
Tooth movement of the experimental side was more rapid compared to control side without any side effects |
Hussain et al., 2011 [23] | • N=15 patients • Age range: 17-28 • No drop out |
Calcitriol | • 15μg of calciriol was injected in the distal side of the maxillary canine in the experimental side and 0.2 ml of vehicle in the control side • 25μg of calciriol was injected in the distal side of the maxillary canine in the experimental side and 0.2 ml of vehicle in the control side. • 40μg of calciriol was injected in the distal side of the maxillary canine in the experimental side and 0.2 ml of vehicle in the control side * These injections were repeated three times for every subject at 3 visits |
The right and left maxillary canines retraction was carried out in the 2nd phase using SS base archwire with a distalizing force of 150g | Tooth movement was measured using digital vernier as the distance between the maxillary canine and 2nd premolar before and after treatment. | • 3 weeks treatment • The follow up period for every patient included five visits at one week intervals |
25 μg of calcitriol produces the greatest tooth movement when compared to control and other groups: 1.57±0.84 mm | • Calcitriol can reduce treatment time up to 12 weeks without any side effect • In dose dependent manner it can be a cost-effective way to accelerate OTM |
Arantes et al., 2009 [22] | • N=36 patients • Age range: 16-25 • No drop out |
Tenoxicam | • Group A received 20mg tablet before activation and placebo after • Group B received the opposite • Group C received only placebo before and after |
Retraction of the maxillary canines was carried out using NiTi springs | Tooth movement was determined by measuring the distance between the canine and second premolar teeth with a caliper | • 30 days treatment period • Follow up was not clear |
OTM was statistically similar between the tenoxicam & placebo groups | Tenoxicam resulted in reduction in pain intensity without alteration in tooth movement |
Mcgorray et al., 2011 [21] | • N=39 patients (11males, 28 females) • Mean age: 26.9 • 4 patients didn’t complete 7 or 8 of 8 doses |
Relaxin | • 0.2ml of relaxin was injected to the target teeth weekly for 8 weeks • 0.2ml of placebo was injected to the target teeth weekly for 8 weeks (control) |
A series of 4 maxillary aligners each of them was dispensed at week 0, 2, 4 and 6 to produce 2mm for the selected maxillary right and left canines | Weekly PVS impressions were scanned and superimposed according to reference points |
• 8 weeks treatment time • Evaluation of retention (weeks 9-12), then a final visit at week 32 for safety |
Average tooth movement over the 8 weeks period was 0.83 mm for the Relaxin group and 0.83mm for the placebo group | • No difference in tooth movement was observed between the 2 groups • No difference in relapse between both groups at 4 weeks follow up period |
Patil et al., 2005 [25] | • N=15 patients (5 males,10 females) • Mean age: 17.78 • 1 case dropped out |
Prostaglandin E1 |
• 1g of PGE1 was injected in the distal side of the right maxillary canine • 1g of Lignocaine as a vehicle was injected in the distal side of the left maxillary canine as a control *These injections were repeated three times for every subject at 3 visits (the 1st day, 6th day and 17th day of the start of canine retraction) |
Canine retraction was performed using NiTi retraction coil springs with 150g of light continuous force | Occlusalgram of pre and post retraction models were superimposed using specific landmarks, distance traveled by tip of canine was measured with a digital caliper | • 60 days treatment duration • Follow up was not clear |
• Mean value of tooth movement in the PGE1 experimental side was 3.5 mm • Mean value of tooth movement in the control side was 2mm |
Significant increase of tooth movement of the experimental canine compared to the control canine with a ratio of 1.7:1 and no side effects |