Abstract
The purpose of this study was to evaluate differences in the extent of root resorption between continuous arch and sectional mechanics. Fifty-six persons with similar malocclusions requiring the extraction of four premolars were divided into two equal groups and treated with the two different techniques. Once the canines were retracted with sliding mechanics (continuous arch wire group) or with force driven retraction loops (sectional mechanics group), the anterior teeth were then retracted with 300 gm Sentalloy coil springs (GAC international, Central Islip, N.Y.). The extent of root resorption of the anterior teeth was evaluated radiographically. Both treatment groups exhibited the same levels of resorption indicating that the side effect of treatment may be due to individual variation and not to the "round tripping" of teeth so often assumed.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
