EVALUATION OF MOLAR PROTRACTION WITH DISTRACTOR AND MICRO-OSTEOPERFORATION- A COMPARATIVE STUDY”
Keywords:
Molar protraction, Micro-osteoperforation, Distraction osteogenesis, T-loop, Accelerated orthodonticsAbstract
Background: Accelerating orthodontic tooth movement is a major clinical goal to reduce treatment duration. Techniques such as micro-osteoperforation (MOP) and distraction osteogenesis (DO) have been proposed as effective adjuncts.
Materials and methods
This in-vivo randomized clinical study was conducted on 30 patients with Class I malocclusion requiring molar protraction. The subjects were randomly allocated into three groups of 10 each: Group A treated with conventional T-loop mechanics, Group B with distractor-assisted osteogenesis, and Group C with micro-osteoperforation (MOP) combined with T-loop mechanics. Standard MBT fixed appliances were used in all patients. Molar protraction was measured intraorally as the distance between the second molar and premolar using a digital vernier caliper at baseline (T0), 45 days (T1), and 90 days (T2). The collected data were subjected to statistical analysis using appropriate parametric and non-parametric tests, with the level of significance set at p < 0.05.
Objective: To evaluate and compare the amount and rate of second molar protraction using conventional T-loop mechanics, distractor-assisted osteogenesis, and MOP combined with T-loop mechanics.
Results:
All groups showed significant molar protraction (p<0.05). The distractor group demonstrated the highest rate of tooth movement, followed by MOP with T-loop, while conventional T-loop showed the least movement.
Conclusion:
Distractor-assisted osteogenesis provides maximum acceleration but is invasive. MOP offers a minimally invasive alternative with significant acceleration, while T-loop remains a reliable conventional method.
