Mulligan bypass arch group provided a more controlled and faster tooth movement when compared to active laceback ligature, mainly attributed to the arch wire material and type of force. Objective: To compare the efficiency and effectiveness of Active laceback ligatures with that of Mulligan bypass arch for the amount of retraction, tipping and rotation. Materials and Methods: 20 patients were selected for the study who required upper 1 st premolar extraction for decrowding. All patients were treated with 3M Gemini - MBT 0.022” metal brackets. Patients were divided into 2 groups of 10 patientsin each group. Group 1 was treated with active laceback ligature and group 2 with Mulligan bypass arch. Changes were measured on the cast with a digital vernier caliper. Student ‘t’test was used to determine the mean differences between the two groups for the amount of retraction, tipping and rotation. Results: Significant distal movement of Canine occurred in both the groups. Movement of canine was more in group 2 but distal tipping of canine and distopalatal rotation of the molar was more in group 1. These differences were mainly attributed to the arch wire material and type of force. Conclusion: Mulligan bypass arch group provided a more controlled and faster tooth movement when compared to active laceback ligature.

PDF] Effectiveness of laceback ligatures on maxillary canine retraction.

PDF] Individual canine retraction: RCT comparing Mulligan bypasses

T-loop spring vs ricketts maxillary canine retractor in canine retraction efficacy and anchorage loss control: A cone-beam computed tomography study - ScienceDirect

Haematologica, Volume 105, Issue 11 by Haematologica - Issuu

PDF) Individual canine retraction: RCT comparing Mulligan bypasses

PDF) Comparison Between Laceback and Tie-back in Sliding Mechanics (An in vitro study)

PDF) Individual canine retraction: RCT comparing Mulligan bypasses

PDF) Class II with ectopic canines in upper arch and severe crowding in lower arch treated by segmented arch technique- A case report

PDF) Individual canine retraction: RCT comparing Mulligan bypasses