Anchorage loss and distal teeth movement


Aim: To develop the amount of canine retraction or space closure and the amount of mesial migration of anchorage. Materials and Methods: Data collected from treated patients attending College ofDentistry/ Mosul University and from private clinics, in which a standardized method used for treatment work. Sixty eight patients, 37 have Class I crowding and 31 have Class II malocclusion weredivided into two groups: Growing and non–growing patients. The data subjected to statistical analysis for description of variables. Results: There were what we can call them "primary factors" affectinganchorage loss which is represented by the type of malocclusion. In Class II malocclusion, greater anchorage loss than Class I crowding, and in the "secondary factors" effect of patients age, higheranchorage loss in growing subjects than non–growing patients was found. Conclusion: The type of malocclusion is important in affecting anchorage loss which is considered a primary factor. Also,higher anchorage loss in growing patients than non–growing patients was found.