Evaluation of bite opening by connecticut intrusion arch with and without cinch back on the distal end of the tube of first molars and mini- implant

• Author Details:   
• Sushmita Sudhakarrao Patil ^*
• Amit Jaykumar Ajmera
• Suchita Sadashiv Daokar
• Gauri Hanmantrao Patil
• Nilesh Dilip More
• Akshay Namdev Kokate
• Omkar Ishwar Diwate Patil

---

Introduction: The intrusion of maxillary incisors is required for deep bite repair in patients with convex profiles, increased visibility of maxillary incisors, and normal or increased vertical dimension. For this, miniscrews or intrusion arches are frequently utilised. The Connecticut intrusion arch (CIA), a prefabricated intrusion arch, and temporary anchoring devices (TADs) are compared in the current study for orthodontic intrusion efficacy.
Aim: To evaluate and compare bite opening by Connecticut intrusion arch with and without cinch back and mini- implant.
Materials and Methods: Thirty individuals between the ages of 15 – 30 years receiving fixed orthodontic treatment participated in the current prospective research. CIA with cinch back were positioned in Group I, CIA without cinch back in group II and TADs were positioned for incursion in Group III. Treatment changes among the groups were evaluated using ANOVA test.
Results: There was no significant difference in terms of intrusion between the CIA with and without cinch back group, but there was a significant difference in terms of intrusion between the CIA with cinch back and mini-implant. The maxillary incisor exhibits intrusion and backward movement in CIAs with cinch back groups, while the maxillary incisor exhibits intrusion and forward movement in CIAs without cinch back groups.
Conclusions: Maxillary incisors intrusion with a minimal protrusion could be achieved with the connecticut intrusion arch with cinch back and mini-implant technique. Anchorage control was good with mini-implant.

Keywords: Bite opening, Connecticut intrusion arch, Intrusion, Temporary anchorage devices, Cinch back.