Dental study pits two retraction methods Head-to-Head
NCT ID NCT05963438
First seen Jun 26, 2026 · Last updated Jun 26, 2026
Summary
This completed trial compared two orthodontic techniques—en-masse retraction and two-step retraction—for moving front teeth backward after upper premolar extractions. Eighty patients aged 18 to 25 with class II bite issues received mini-implants as anchors. The goal was to see which method better affects tooth position in terms of forward-backward, vertical, and side-to-side dimensions.
What this could mean
Our plain-language read of the trial. This is informational only, not medical advice or a prediction.
- Active substance
- anterior retraction procedure
- What this could lead to
- If this shows one method is better, it could help orthodontists choose the most effective technique for moving front teeth back using mini-implants.
- What could go wrong
- This is a small, completed trial focused on measuring tooth movement, not on curing a disease. Results may not apply to all patients or other dental conditions.
This is an AI summary of the original study and may miss details. Read our disclaimer.
Study facts
What this study's own registry entry says, in plain language.
- Phase
-
Not a phased trial
Phase numbers describe drug development. The registry uses this when they do not apply, as it does for trials of devices, procedures or behaviour changes, and for observational studies.
- Participants
-
80 people
The number who actually took part.
- Started
-
Oct 2022
- Finished
-
Jun 2024
- Lead sponsor
-
Other sponsor
The registry's catch-all category, for sponsors it does not file as a company, a government agency, or a research network.
Who can take part
This study's own entry requirements. Only the study team can say for certain whether you qualify.
- Ages
-
18 to 25 years
- Sex
-
Anyone
- Healthy volunteers
-
Accepted
You do not need to have the condition being studied to take part.
Show the full entry requirements Hide the full entry requirements
Copied word for word from the study's registry entry, so the wording is the study team's rather than ours.
Inclusion Criteria: * 1\. Both male and female patients with age of 18- 25 years. 2. Cases treated with upper first premolars extractions. 3. Cases having class II molar relation which is mesiobuccal cusp of maxillary first permanent molar occludes anterior to the buccal groove of mandibular first molar on both sides as assessed clinically. 4\. Overjet \> 5mm and \< 12mm as assessed clinically. 5. Cases with no remaining growth as assessed by cervical vertebrae maturation stages (cvm) ≥4 on lateral cephalometric radiograph . 6\. Cases with no congenitally missing teeth (excluding third molars). Exclusion Criteria: * 1\. Long term use of systemic corticosteroids, calcium channel blockers \& anti-inflammatory drugs. 2\. Cases with syndromes like cleft lip and palate as assessed clinically. 3. Cases in which active growth is still taking place as assessed by cervical vertebrae maturation stages (cvm) ≤ 3 on lateral cephalometric radiograph. 4\. Radiographic evidence of bone loss. 5. Periodontal disease as assessed clinically.
Get updates
Get notified about this study
Sign up to get updates when this study changes or when new studies for En-masse retraction to two- steps retraction are added.
Genom att skicka in godkänner du våra Användarvillkor
As listed by the trial registrant
The condition terms exactly as the trial's registrant entered them.
Contacts and locations
Locations
-
Dow University of Health Sciences
Karachi, Sindh, Pakistan