Comparison of effectiveness of two canine retraction techniques using direct and indirect skeletal anchorage systems

The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of two different canine retraction springs and anchorage systems combined with direct and indirect skeletal anchorage systems in cases requiring first premolar extractions and maximum anchorage in upper jaws.Thirty six patients among patients referred to our clinic, are selected for the study (17 boys, 19 girls). Average age of the patients was 16.8 (12.66-21.92). Mini-implant supported Nance appliance with indirect skeletal anchorage system was applied to 18 patients and mini implant supported direct skeletal anchorage system to the rest. Segmental retraction arch with reverse closing loop was applied to one of the upper canines randomly selected with the purpose of canine distalization following first premolar extraction and Ladanyi spring was applied to the other canine. Retraction was continued until the Class I canine relationship was obtained. Lateral cephalometric film before and after distalization and orthodontics models were used in order to evaluate changes occurring during canine distalization. Obtained data were statistically evaluated using paired t test and independent t test in 95% confidence interval.Both RCL and LS were found effective in canine distalization according to the data obtained (p?0.001). Statistically significant difference couldn?t be found between RCL and LS regarding effectiveness (p?0.05). Both of the skeletal anchorage systems used in the study were found effective in providing maximum anchorage (p?0.05) and no statistically significant difference were detected between two methods (p?0.05).As a result, both direct and indirect skeletal anchorage systems are effective methods for providing maximum anchorage. These two anchorage systems can be safely used during segmental distalization of canines requiring maximum anchorage.