Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
The aim of this prospective clinical project will be to compare the effect of platelet rich fibrin versus low- intensity pulsed ultrasound on therate of different orthodontic tooth movements during clear aligner therapy.
The aim of this prospective clinical project will be to compare the effect of platelet rich fibrin versus low- intensity pulsed ultrasound on therate of different orthodontic tooth movements during clear aligner therapy.specifically canine retraction,incsiors levellingand aliggnment,maxillary molar distalizationand incisors intrusion
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Experimental: Lipus side: closure of premolar extraction space | Experimental | application of LIPUS with translation of closure of premolar extraction space that will be performed on intervention sides according to a standardized protocol |
|
| No Intervention: LIPUS side control side | No Intervention | LIPUS side:closure of premolar extraction space control side | |
| Experimental:iPRF side closure of premolar extraction space | Experimental | closure ofpremolar extraction space that will be performed with iPRFapplication according to a standardized protocol |
|
| iPRF side closure of premolar extraction spacecontrol side | No Intervention | iPRF side canine retraction control side wihout intervention | |
| Experimental: LIPUS groupMolar distalization group inrervention side | Experimental | distalization assisted with LIPUS according to a standardized protocol |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| low intensity pulsed ultrasound and iPRF | Device | iPRF and LIPUS has been found to speed up OTM by stimulating the RANK/RANKL/OPG system to initiate osteoclast formation. |
|
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Influence of low-level laser therapy versus low-intensity pulsed ultrasound on rate of different orthodontic tooth movements by millimeter | rate of orthodontic tooth movement by millimeter | post interventionalal at 6months |
Not provided
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
- A- leveling and alignment Eligibility criteria
1. Age ranges from 14 to 17 years. 2. Bilateral Class II molar relationship. 3. Skeletal Class I or mild Class II relationship. 4. Normal or decreased vertical height. 5. No posterior crowding or spaces. 6. Fully erupted maxillary first and second molars. 7. Congenitally missing or extracted third molars. 8. Good oral hygiene. 9. Absence of any periodontal disease and alveolar bone loss. 10. Absence of medications that may inhibit orthodontic movement
Lower incisor leveling and alignment Inclusion criteria Complete permanent dentition (third molars not included); Moderate mandibular anterior crowding (with little's irregularity index score greater than 4 mm) who required non-extraction approach in the mandibular arch; No tooth size, shape or root abnormalities visible on the patient's radiographic records; No spaces in the mandibular arch; No blocked out tooth that did not allow for placement of the bracket at the
initial bonding appointment; 6. No required management with interproximal stripping, inter-maxillary elastics, open NiTi springs, and removable or extra-oral devices. Canine retraction Eligibility criteria
Age, 15 to 25 years; Class ii division 1 malocclusion with mild or no crowding; No previous orthodontic treatment; No systemic disease that might have affected bone formation or density, such as osteoporosis, hyperparathyroidism, or vitamin d deficiency; Adequate oral hygiene; Probing depth values not exceeding 3 mm across the Entire dentition; Adequate thickness of the attached gingiva (1-2 mm); No radiographic evidence of bone loss -
Exclusion Criteria:Patients who required surgery to correct skeletal discrepancies. Patients with congenital dentoskeletal disorders. Missed or mutilated teeth in maxillary arch. Patients with poor oral hygiene and/or periodontally compromised patients Severe dental crowding that necessitates an extraction approach 2. Abnormal anteroposterior and vertical relationships; 3. Patients with cleft lip and palate, anomalies, and syndromes; 4. Previous orthodontic 5. Treatment; 6. Regular medications intake that could interfere with otm. -
-
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AlAzhar university | Cairo | Egypt |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| No Intervention: LIPUS groupMolar distalization group control side |
| No Intervention |
distalization without LIPUS intervention |
| Experimental: iPRFgroup: distalization intervntion side | Experimental | distalization will be commenced with application of iPRF according to a standardized protocol |
|
| No Intervention: iPRF group: distalization control side | No Intervention | distalization will be commenced without application of LLLT according to a standardized protocol |
| Experimental: LIPUS group: leveling and alignment | Experimental | leveling and alignment assisted with LIPUS according to a standardized protocol |
|
| Experimental: iPRF group: leveling and alignment | Experimental | leveling and alignment be commenced with application of iPRF according to a standardized protocol |
|
| No Intervention: leveling and alignment without intervention | No Intervention | leveling and alignment without intervention |
| Experimental: LIPUS group: Intrusion | Experimental | intrusion assisted with LIPUS according to a standardized protocol |
|
| Experimental: iPRF group: Intrusion | Experimental | intrusion assisted with application of iPRF according to a standardized protocol |
|
| No Intervention: intrusion control group | No Intervention | intrusion without intervention |
|