Background: The impaction of the maxillary canine is a common occurrence, and orthodontists must be prepared to manage it. The purpose of this article is to present a study of the efficacy of a double-wire orthodontic appliance compared to a control group in the alignment of impacted maxillary canines in the dental arch. Methods: To diagnose an impacted maxillary canine, a panoramic radiograph was taken and a detailed analysis was performed by the same orthodontist. This article presents the results of 28 impacted maxillary canines with inclusion criteria of A2 (tooth angulation to the midline 16°–45°), V1 (vertical height of the tooth crown above the cementoenamel junction but less than half the length of the root of the maxillary lateral incisor), and O3 (medial position of the canine crown of more than half but less than the entire root width of the lateral incisor) positions in 21 patients (7 males and 14 females) with a mean age of 14.02 years (SD = 1.61) who were treated by the same orthodontist for impacted maxillary canines using a fixed double-wire orthodontic appliance. The analyzed data were compared with the control group (treated with a fixed orthodontic appliance and active ligature), which was matched for pretreatment age and the A2, V1, and O3 positions of the impacted maxillary canine. Results: With both methods, the impacted maxillary canines were aligned and guided into a correct position in the dental arch, but the mean active orthodontic traction of 31 ± 4.2 weeks in the SG was statistically significantly shorter (p < 0.05) in comparison to 37 ± 6.3 weeks in the CG, and the number of visits was statistically significantly (p < 0.05) fewer in the SG (5 ± 2) than in the CG (11 ± 5). Conclusions: The findings of this study are important to the field of orthodontics and show that the alignment of impacted maxillary canines with A2, V1, and O3 positions can be achieved with both methods, but with the double-wire appliance, the treatment time was shorter and the number of visits was statistically significantly fewer. The results of this study suggest that this approach may be more efficient and cost-effective compared to conventional methods.

中文翻译：

---

上颌阻生尖牙两种不同治疗方法的比较：一项回顾性研究

背景：上颌尖牙阻生是一种常见现象，正畸医生必须做好处理它的准备。本文的目的是研究双线正畸矫治器与对照组相比，在牙弓中阻生上颌尖牙的排列方面的功效。方法：为了诊断上颌阻生尖牙，由同一位正牙医生拍摄全景X光片并进行详细分析。本文介绍了 28 颗上颌阻生尖牙的结果，纳入标准为 A2（牙齿与中线的角度为 16°–45°）、V1（牙冠在牙釉质交界处上方的垂直高度，但小于牙根长度的一半） 21 例患者（男 7 例，女 14 例），平均年龄 14.02 岁（上颌侧切牙）、O3（犬牙冠内侧位置超过侧切牙的一半但小于整个牙根宽度）位置（ SD = 1.61）由同一位正牙医生使用固定双线正畸矫治器治疗上颌阻生尖牙。将分析数据与对照组（使用固定正畸矫治器和主动结扎治疗）进行比较，对照组的治疗前年龄以及阻生上颌尖牙的 A2、V1 和 O3 位置相匹配。结果：通过这两种方法，上颌阻生尖牙均已对齐并引导至牙弓中的正确位置，但与 37 周相比，SG 中的平均主动正畸牵引时间为 31 ± 4.2 周，在统计学上显着缩短 (p < 0.05) CG 中为 ± 6.3 周，并且 SG 中的就诊次数 (5 ± 2) 显着 (p < 0.05) 少于 CG (11 ± 5)。结论：本研究结果对正畸领域具有重要意义，表明两种方法均可实现上颌阻生尖牙与 A2、V1 和 O3 位置的对齐，但使用双丝矫治器时，治疗时间缩短时间更短，访问次数统计上也显着减少。这项研究的结果表明，与传统方法相比，这种方法可能更有效且更具成本效益。