Skip to main content
Scientific Reports logoLink to Scientific Reports
. 2019 Oct 10;9:14549. doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-51057-4

Three-dimensional analysis of the physiologic drift of adjacent teeth following maxillary first premolar extractions

Fei Teng 1, Fei-Yu Du 1, Hui-Zhong Chen 1, Ruo-Ping Jiang 1, Tian-Min Xu 1,
PMCID: PMC6787091  PMID: 31601925

Abstract

We assessed the three-dimensional (3D) pattern of the physiologic drift of the remaining adjacent teeth after premolar extraction due to orthodontic reasons and the associated factors. Data were collected from 45 patients aged 17.04 ± 5.14 years who were scheduled to receive a fixed appliance after maxillary premolar extraction. Seventy-five drift models were obtained and digitalized via 3D scanning. The average physiologic drift duration was 81.66 ± 70.03 days. Angular and linear changes in the first molars, second premolars, and canines were measured using the 3D method. All the examined teeth had tipped and moved towards the extraction space, leading to space decreases. Posterior teeth primarily exhibited significant mesial tipping and displacement, without rotation or vertical changes. All canine variables changed, including distal inward rotation and extrusion. The physiologic drift tended to slow over time. Age had a limited negative effect on the mesial drift of posterior teeth, whereas crowding had a limited positive effect on canine drift. Thus, the mesial drift of molars after premolar extraction may lead to molar anchorage loss, particularly among younger patients. The pattern of the physiologic drift of maxillary canines can help relieve crowding and facilitate labially ectopic canine alignment, whereas canine drift is accelerated by more severe crowding.

Subject terms: Oral diseases, Software

Introduction

Based on the theories of Weinstein1 and Proffit2, the relative stability of tooth position is maintained by the equilibrium of intrinsic forces from the lip and tongue, extrinsic forces from habits or orthodontic appliances, dental occlusal forces, and forces from the periodontal membrane. When teeth are missing due to caries, periodontal disease, trauma, or extraction, the equilibrium will be broken, and the remaining dentition will spontaneously move to establish a new equilibrium.

Extraction has been a very common strategy in orthodontic treatment since Tweed3 and Begg4 reported it over 60 years ago. The most commonly extracted teeth for orthodontic purposes are the first premolars5. Although controversial6,7, extraction is commonly used to correct the tooth discrepancy8, affect the vertical dimension9, retract incisors10 and relieve crowding11. After extraction, the missing premolars can induce a spontaneous adjustment of dentition.

Bourdet12 termed this adjustment “physiologic drift”. Because this is a common phenomenon in cases with missing teeth, several animal experiments have been performed since the 1960s to confirm the drift1325, establish an experimental animal model14,21,23, and explore the mechanism1520,24,25.

Physiologic drift is important in orthodontic treatment. Some orthodontic techniques use the drift to simplify the treatment, including the methods of Alexander26 and PASS27. However, the benefit of long-term physiologic drift—including the spontaneous and uncontrolled movement of dentition—with current treatments need to be evaluated.

Previous clinical research has primarily focused on mandibular dentition2833. After the extraction of lower premolars, the researchers observed mesial movement of the first molar and the distal movement of the canines, including tipping and translation. Extraction sites also tend to close, and the incisors spontaneously migrate to reduce crowding. Hence, studies have proposed a delay in the bonding of the appliances for the lower arch to take advantage of the physiologic drift. The first molar is usually the most important anchorage tooth during orthodontic treatment34, and its mesial movement could contribute to a potential risk of losing anchorage. However, studies35,36 have found that the movements of these lower first molars are minimal and only account for a small proportion of closure of the premolar extraction space during the drift.

Physiologic drift does not only occur in the lower arch35,3742, but only a few studies35,38,40,42 have assessed the physiologic drift of maxillary dentition, and even fewer have addressed this issue in orthodontics. The maxillary arch usually requires stronger anchorage34 for orthodontic treatment. Thus, identification of the characteristics of physiologic drift of the upper arch following tooth extraction may help to control upper anchorage in the duration between extraction and bonding application, or even during the early stage of treatment using very soft wires. Hence, it is vital to design an appropriate research study to assess the problem.

Most previous studies2833,3537 have used manual measurement with lateral cephalometric radiographs and dental cast models to evaluate dentition drift after premolar extraction. However, accurate relative three-dimensional (3D) tooth displacement during physiologic drift has not been evaluated. In the present study, we aimed to quantify the physiologic drift of untreated adjacent teeth following first premolar extraction during the permanent dentition stage using 3D digital technology. To our knowledge, this is the first study to assess the 3D pattern of the physiologic drift of the maxillary remaining adjacent teeth after first premolar extraction for orthodontic reasons and the associated factors.

Results

Patient and sample cohort

The descriptive data on the characteristics of the 45 participants were as follows:

  1. Sex: 10 male and 35 female;

  2. Age: 17.04 ± 5.14 years, from 12 to 29 years, and the 95% confidence interval was 15.97 to 18.12 years;

  3. Angle Classification43: Angle I, 16; Angle II, 13; Angle III, 6;

  4. Crowding prior to extraction: 3.69 ± 2.41 mm, from 0 to 12 mm, and the 95% confidence interval was 2.96 to 4.41 mm.

The descriptive data on the characteristics of the 150 extraction sides at TX were as follows:

  1. Sex: 30 male and 120 female;

  2. Age: 15.79 ± 4.49 years, from 12 to 29 years, and the 95% confidence interval was 15.06 to 16.51 years;

  3. Angle Classification43: Angle I, 62; Angle II, 50; Angle III, 38;

  4. Crowding prior to extraction: 1.79 ± 1.64 mm, from 0 to 6 mm, and the 95% confidence interval was 1.52 to 2.05 mm.

  5. The average drift duration was 81.66 ± 70.03 days.

  6. Distribution after grouping based on the months of drift at Tx: 1 month, 50; 2 months, 23; 3 months, 24; 4 months, 11; 5 months, 10; 6 months, 11; more than 6 months, 19.

Correlation of the change in the physiologic drift variables with drift time

Table 1 shows the correlation between the changes in some variables and physiologic drift duration after first maxillary premolar extraction, indicating that these variables may markedly change with time (Pearson’s r, p < 0.05). Such variables included U6a, U6i, U6m, U5a, U5m, SC, and all canine variables. These variables need to be further analyzed. By contrast, changes in U6r, U6v, U5i, U5r, and U5v were not marked over time; hence, they were not assessed further.

Table 1.

Pearson’s r between drift duration (days) and changes in the variables.

Pearson’s r Variables
Angulation:
mesial tipping (+) distal tipping (−)
Inclination:
labioversion (+) linguoversion (−)
Rotation:
mesial inward (+)
distal inward (−)
Mediodistal displacement:
mesial movement (+) distal movement (−)
Vertical
displacement:
extrusion (+)
intrusion (−)
Extraction
space closure:
increase (+)
decrease (−)
r p value r p value r p value r p value r p value r p value
U6 0.647 <0.001 −0.414 <0.001 0.021 0.796 0.768 <0.001 0.020 0.813
U5 0.539 <0.001 0.035 0.675 −0.080 0.328 0.756 <0.001 0.035 0.675
U3 −0.610 <0.001 −0.441 <0.001 −0.643 <0.001 −0.662 <0.001 0.574 <0.001
−0.759 <0.001

U6 for the first molar, U5 for the second premolar, U3 for the canine.

Changes in the variables of the adjacent tooth

The abovementioned markedly changed variables were selected, and the average monthly change was estimated and depicted using line charts (Fig. 1). Only a few cases had extraction sides with drifts over 6 months; hence, only the data from the first 6 months were considered when assessing the extent of the changes.

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Monthly average changes in the variables of the adjacent tooth: (a) Changes in the angular variables. (b) Changes in the linear variables. Angulation: mesial tipping (+) or distal tipping (−). Inclination: labioversion (+) or linguoversion (−). Rotation: mesial inward rotation (+) or distal inward rotation (−). Mesiodistal displacement: mesial movement (+) or distal movement (−). Vertical displacement: extrusion (+) or intrusion (−). Extraction space closure: space increase (+) or space decrease (−).

U3 markedly changed in all directions. U3 inclined lingually and distally, and showed distal inward rotation, extrusion, and distal movement. U6 and U5 had tipped and displaced mesially, and U6 also showed changes in lingual inclination. The adjacent teeth near the extraction site tipped into the space; hence, the extraction space decreased over time.

Factors influencing physiologic drift

The monthly average velocities of the marked changes in variables were calculated (Table 2) and used to explore the influences of other factors, such as sex, age, Angle classification, drift duration and crowding prior to extraction, on physiologic drift.

Table 2.

Average monthly velocity of the change in each variable.

Average velocity of change N Mean SD 95%
confidence
interval
T value p value
Lower
limit
Upper
limit
Angulation (°/month)
VU6a 150 1.127 1.389 0.907 1.348 10.100 <0.01
VU5a 150 1.541 2.041 1.217 1.864 9.399 <0.01
VU3a 150 −1.268 1.966 −1.580 −0.956 −8.029 <0.01
Inclination (°/month)
VU6i 150 −0.557 1.982 −0.872 −0.242 −3.501 <0.01
VU3i 150 −1.096 2.445 −1.484 −0.708 −5.581 <0.01
Rotation (°/month)
VU3r 150 −1.083 2.067 −1.411 −0.755 −6.520 <0.01
Mesiodistal displacement (mm/month)
VU6m 150 0.386 0.430 0.318 0.454 11.162 <0.01
VU5m 150 0.451 0.422 0.384 0.518 13.295 <0.01
VU3m 150 −0.482 0.586 −0.575 −0.389 10.241 <0.01
Vertical displacement (mm/month)
VU3v 150 0.324 0.531 0.240 0.409 7.602 <0.01
Extraction space closure (mm/month)
VSC 150 −0.792 0.621 −0.891 −0.396 −15.868 <0.01

Angulation: mesial tipping (+) or distal tipping (−).

Inclination: labioversion (+) or linguoversion (−).

Rotation: mesial inward rotation (+) or distal inward rotation (−).

Mesiodistal displacement: mesial movement (+) or distal movement (−).

Vertical displacement: extrusion (+) or intrusion (−).

Extraction space closure: space increase (+) or space decrease (−).

Multiple linear regression models (Table 3) showed that sex and the Angle classification have no significant influence on all the velocities. All the velocities decrease with drift time except VU6i and VU3r. Age and crowding may have a moderate effect on certain velocities. VU6a, VU6m, VU5a, VU5m, and VSC may decrease with age. More severe crowding prior to extraction may lead to an increase in VU3a, VU3i, VU3m, VU3v, and VSC. However, these factors may have a limited influence on the velocity of physiologic drift because the R² of all the linear regression models only ranged from 0.136 to 0.225.

Table 3.

Multiple linear regression model of the velocity of each variable.

Velocity of variables Standardized Coefficients F
Sex Age Angle I Angle II Angle III Crowding Drift duration
VU6a −0.333* REF −0.037 0.086 −0.280* 0.136 0.001
VU6i REF 0.029 −0.087 0.010 0.452
VU6m −0.270* REF −0.046 0.066 0.037 −0.326* 0.156 0.035
VU5a −0.284* REF −0.093 0.169 −0.303* 0.158 0.001
VU5m −0.346* REF −0.033 0.073 −0.362* 0.172 <0.001
VU3a REF 0.142 0.087 −0.209* 0.207* 0.171 0.013
VU3i REF −0.007 −0.078 −0.228* 0.234* 0.172 0.005
VU3r 0.048 REF −0.032 −0.073 0.020 0.083 0.555
VU3m REF 0.041 −0.089 −0.241* 0.275* 0.197 0.001
VU3v REF 0.049 −0.051 0.205* −0.262* 0.159 0.019
VSC 0.358* REF 0.108 −0.104 −0.216* 0.294* 0.225 <0.001

*Standardized Coefficients, p value < 0.05

Angulation: mesial tipping (+) or distal tipping (−).

Inclination: labioversion (+) or linguoversion (−).

Rotation: mesial inward rotation (+) or distal inward rotation (−).

Mesiodistal displacement: mesial movement (+) or distal movement (−).

Vertical displacement: extrusion (+) or intrusion (−).

Extraction space closure: space increase (+) or space decrease (−).

Discussion

Manual measurement, via lateral cephalometric radiographs and dental cast models, was used in most previous studies2833,3537 of dentition drift to assess tooth movement. However, only certain aspects of tooth movement were analyzed. Tipping and displacement of the teeth in the mesial-distal direction were often considered28,31,37. Closure of the extraction space was also discussed by some researchers29,30,33. Only a few studies focused on the change in other directions such as transversal angulations32 and rotation37. A reason for this may be because cephalometric measurement may only reflect the changes in the sagittal and vertical directions, and the manual measurement of pre- and post-extraction cast models could not assess the relative 3D changes accurately using 2 independent models. However, a rare 3D study of the physiologic drift40 of maxillary dentition also did not measure rotation and vertical changes. Most of the physiologic drift occurred in the first 6–12 months29,30,32,37, but the observation intervals were usually longer than this quick period of drift28,3033,37, making it difficult to evaluate the continuous and specific characteristics of physiologic drift during this period. The use of a 3D laser scanner to digitalize the cast provides a new and convenient option to measure tooth displacement that is considered accurate and reliable4446. Using 3D methods47,48 in this study, we conducted comprehensive and accurate measurements of 3D changes in the teeth after maxillary first premolar extractions at about 1-month interval.

Table 1 shows significant changes during the observation, and Table 2 shows the average velocity and direction. The most marked angular and linear change in the measured teeth exhibited a change towards the mesiodistal direction. These teeth showed marked movement and tipped into the extraction space, consistent with several other studies2832,35,37. Additionally, the present study measured the changes in labiolingual inclination and rotation for each tooth using 3D methods. U6 and U3 showed lingual inclination, whereas U5 showed no significant inclination (Pearson’s r, p > 0.05). The difference in the drift pattern between the posterior teeth and canines may result from the lack of occlusal interference with the canines. U3 showed significant extrusion and rotation, although U6 and U5 did not, possibly because these teeth had more occlusal contact16 and were multirooted.

The findings from the present study and previous research have shown that tipping is the main style of movement during physiologic drift after extraction, and this phenomenon could partially prove the hypothesis that transseptal fibers, which are embedded in the cementum between adjacent teeth and extend interproximally over the alveolar bone crest, play an important role in physiologic drift. Kusters49 and Murphy13 found that transseptal fibers can self-repair and reconnect adjacent teeth after destruction of the periodontal ligament or extraction. Many previous studies1518,50 also proposed that the reconstruction of transseptal fibers is the main cause of physiologic drift. There are some other potential causes for movement of the teeth into the extraction space. The position of the teeth may be influenced by the soft tissues surrounding them, and they remain stable in the equilibrium state of forces of the stomatognathic system1,2,51,52. Ogushi52 found that lip and cheek muscle pressure was highest at the canine. Hence, it is possible that, after extraction, the arch continuity may have been broken and the posterior support of canines was missed, leading the canines to move distally under the effect of the lip muscle. Moreover, Southard et al.53,54 measured an anterior component of occlusal force and reported its influence on dental alignment, which could also be a reason for the mesial drift of the upper molars after first premolar extraction.

Although this study of maxillary dentition indicated that the trend of physiologic drift of the maxillary teeth was similar to that of mandibular teeth, the speed of the drift was different. Panpadreas31 observed that mandibular dentition drifted approximately 10 months after lower first premolar extraction and found that the lower first molars had completely moved mesially by approximately 1.19 mm and had tipped forward by approximately 1.90°. Weber’s research35 showed that the lower first molars moved mesially by approximately 1.6 and 2.6 mm after the first and second premolar extraction, and the canines moved distally by approximately 4.4 mm over the 2.5 years. Additionally, Mamopoulou37 found that the lower first molar had moved forward by 2.5 mm at 1 year after second premolar extraction. Stephens29 observed that the extraction space decreased by approximately 1.6 mm in women and 3.23 mm in men during the first 6 months after the first premolar extraction. Swessi32 reported that the lower first molar did not markedly move during the long-term observation after the first premolar extraction. The present study found that the maxillary extraction space decreased by an average of 0.792 mm/month after extraction, leading to an approximately 4-mm decrease in the extraction space over 6 months. U6 also showed faster tipping (1.127°/month) and movement (0.386 mm/month) over the 6-month period (Table 2), which may be related to the looser nature of the alveolar bone of the maxilla, relative to the mandible55,56. Hence, the physiologic strength after tooth extraction makes it easier for the maxillary teeth to move.

In many animal experiments, researchers have used rats2125 or Macaca irus1420 to explore the reasons for physiologic drift. The marked differences in the biological nature between these animals and humans made it difficult to identify the true reason for human dental drift after extraction. In rats, there is a lifelong distal drift of the dentition25; in Macaca irus, the natural spaces are more sufficient than those in human dentition20. These findings may be valuable, but clinical studies on humans should be preferred to these animal experiments. To our knowledge, this is the first comprehensive 3D study of maxillary dental physiologic drift after premolar extraction that could help better understand the pattern of physiologic drift in the upper arch.

To explore the influences of several common factors on physiologic drift, multiple linear regression procedures were performed (Table 3). Because the significant variable changes (Table 1) were markedly correlated with drift time, the average velocity of each movement was calculated and chosen as the dependent variable to eliminate the marked effects of drift duration on the quantity of movement. The standardized coefficients between these factors and each velocity, as well as their significance, were also calculated. Sex had no influence on drift, a finding that was consistent with that of Gragg33, but differed from the research of Stephens on the mandible29. The influence of the Angle classification on physiologic drift has not been discussed, and it was not found to be significant in the present study.

As noted in Table 3, the factors significantly influencing physiologic drift included drift duration, age and crowding prior to extraction. Nearly all the velocities decreased with drift duration, indicating that physiologic drift may slow down over time. The extraction spaces tended to close faster in younger patients and crowding had a positive effect on the space closure. A younger sample was associated with faster movement and mesial tipping of U6 and U5, consistent with certain animal experiments24,25. One reason could be that most of the younger patients in the present study were in the late peak period of growth and development. Johnston’s research34 reported that excess growth of the mandible during this period would lead to mesial drift of the maxillary molars to establish a stable molar relationship for dentoalveolar compensation, which could explain why the upper molars of younger patients drifted mesially to a greater degree after premolar extraction. Moreover, the age-related effects on tissue reaction57, the proliferative rate of PDL cells58, osteoclastic activities59 and mineral density in alveolar tissues60 could explain the greater drift in the younger population.

Crowding prior to extraction had a positive effect on the velocity of canine movement in both the horizontal and vertical directions but had no effect on the posterior teeth, probably because crowding primarily occurred in the anterior teeth. Canine malposition is very common among orthodontic patients. The extraction of the first premolar could provide some spaces for these canines with malocclusion. Based on our findings (Table 3), more severe crowding could lead to faster distal tipping, distal displacement, and canine extrusion. Research on mandibular dentition26,31 reported a relief of crowding after extraction. In the present study, the distal direction of canine movement could help reduce crowding. Although the dynamic interaction between crowding and the physiologic drift of canines was complicated to evaluate, we chose crowding before extraction as an independent variable because it was convenient to measure.

Some other endogenous factors could affect the drift, such as periodontitis and eruption of a second molar. Kirschneck61 reported that experimental periodontitis in rats accelerated the tooth movement induced by orthodontic forces. The dental root resorption and periodontal bone loss were also increased during periodontitis, most likely caused by the upregulation of osteoclastic activity. Thus, the possibility that periodontitis could affect the physiologic drift should not be neglected. We excluded patients with moderate to severe gingivitis or periodontal disease and monitored the periodontal status of the participants to eliminate this impact as much as possible. Studies62,63 have shown that an erupting third molar could lead to crowding of the anterior teeth, indicating that an erupting molar could push the adjacent teeth forward. However, the influence of eruption of the second maxillary molar was not evaluated in the present study due to two reasons. First, the eruption of the second maxillary molar is correlated with age, which may lead to collinearity of the independent variables in the linear regression model. Second, it was difficult to evaluate the specific stage of the second molar eruption before extraction and at the end of observation for each sample.

Exogenous factors on the rate of tooth movement could also affect the drift, such as common prescription medication, smoking and alcohol abuse. Makrygiannakis’ systematic review64 concluded that commonly prescribed medications may exhibit variable effects on the rate of orthodontic tooth movement. For example, the rate of orthodontic tooth movement was shown to increase after the administration of diazepam or vitamin C but decrease after the administration of simvastatin, atorvastatin and calcium compounds. Although the quality of the available evidence was considered at best as low in this review, we still excluded patients with chronic or metabolic diseases, who usually need the long-term administration of prescription medication. Increased orthodontic tooth movement was found with regular nicotine intake in a rat model65. Moreover, the extent of root resorption, osteoclast activity, and gene expression of inflammatory and osteoclast markers were significantly increased under the influence of nicotine in this study, indicating that patients with smoking habits may present accelerated orthodontic tooth movement. By contrast, alcohol abuse may have an inhibitory effect on tooth movement during orthodontic therapy66. Araujo’s research66 showed that bone resorption at the end of tooth movement decreased after the administration of 20% ethanol, suggesting a delay in orthodontic tooth movement. We excluded patients with the above-mentioned life habits to eliminate such potential impacts on the physiologic drift.

Alexander26 suggested that bonding appliances to the lower arch should be delayed to allow for natural drifting to relieve anterior crowding after extraction, consistent with other studies31,32,37 on mandibular dentition. Compared with studies of the lower arch, the present study showed that the first molars had tipped and displaced faster and to a greater extent over a similar period (Fig. 1, Table 2), whereas the extraction space decrease showed a similar trend. Moreover, the quantity of displacement of the first molar and canine was similar (approximately 2 mm over 6 months, Fig. 1b). This result differed from that of studies on mandibular dentition, which showed that most extraction space closures were attributed to the distal drift of the canines35,36. Table 3 indicates that the younger patients exhibited faster mesial movement of the posterior teeth. In addition to the mesial drift of the upper molars caused by excess growth of the mandible (as dentoalveolar compensation)34, the upper first molars (perhaps the most important anchorage teeth) could have a higher risk of physiologic anchorage loss, relative to the lower ones after premolar extraction, particularly among younger orthodontic patients during the period of growth and development.

Molars can drift for at least 6 months after extraction (Fig. 1a,b), indicating that they can drift during the time between extraction and start of treatment, and even during the early stage of the treatment, usually using light forces applied by the soft wires for alignment. The effect of such weak forces on physiologic drift of the maxillary first molar remains unclear, but it is known that, for cases requiring maximum control of molar anchorage, this mesial drift of the molars should be controlled as soon as possible after premolar extraction.

For canines, distal tipping, distal movement, and extrusion are beneficial for alignment, particularly among cases with labially ectopic canines or those with anterior teeth crowding. Therefore, the physiologic drift of the canines can be used during treatment. An appliance technology can better offer the potential to control the mesial drift of the upper first molar and could help exploit the distal drift of the canines simultaneously. PASS technology27 considers both aspects. The XBT buccal tube could prevent the continuous mesial tipping movement of the upper first molar initially, and the low friction design at the canine brackets can minimize the prevention of the distal drift, thus achieving both objectives with one option.

Orthodontists usually decide to extract healthy premolars for patients with severe tooth discrepancy8 or crowding11. Additionally, extraction is a commonly used strategy to affect the soft tissue profile10 and skeletal vertical dimension9. However, according to some recent studies6769, the effects on the skeletal and soft tissue of extraction orthodontic treatment could not be confirmed and might be overestimated. Kirschneck’s retrospective cohort study67 reported that premolar extraction in juvenile borderline patients did not lead to a significant reduction in the skeletal and vertical dimensions compared with non-extraction treatment in the short-term. Kouvelis’ systematic review68 also concluded that the extraction treatment protocol aiming to reduce or control the vertical dimension did not seem to be an evidence-based clinical approach. Both Kirschneck’s67 and Iared’s69 studies showed that differences between the changes in the patients’ facial profiles resulting from orthodontic treatment with and without extraction were clinically irrelevant or not significant. The duration of orthodontic treatment was significantly longer in patients who underwent extraction, and Iared69 suggested the cephalometric parameter, Li-E, could help decision making in borderline cases. Combined with the results in the present study that maxillary premolar extraction could lead to molar anchorage loss to some extent by inducing the mesial drift of the first molars, the decision on extraction for orthodontic reasons should be made more carefully. More individual factors and evidence-based implications should be considered when making an integrated treatment plan.

The general trends of the physiologic drift of the remaining adjacent teeth after first premolar extraction could be described in this cross-sectional study, but this study had some limitations. Errors may be caused due to cast preparation, cast digitalization and measurement47,48 at each interval because the 3D dental scanner (R700 linear laser scanner; 3shape Corp., Denmark) can register numerous coordinates in three dimensions with ±20 μm precision of the scan. The generalizability of these results might be limited by the characteristics of the study sample because this single-center study included mostly teenage and young adult patients seeking orthodontic treatment. There are some bias factors in the characteristics of the participants because most of the patients with long-term observation required mild or medium anchorage. Some of the observed results from this study showed high individual variation, consistent with some other research31,32,37, indicating that, although the general trends of the physiologic drift could be summarized, some individual differences exist in the drift of patients with different patterns of malocclusion. Some factors significantly influencing the physiologic drift were filtered by multiple linear regression procedures, while the R² of all the linear regression models only ranged from 0.136 to 0.225, indicating that these factors might only have limited contribution to the physiologic changes in these samples. Thus, the average velocities of these changes generally remained stable for at least 6 months after extraction in this study. However, the prolonged observation time would impede the therapy because the uncontrolled tooth movement during physiologic drift could lead to maxillary molar anchorage loss and affect the treatment outcomes. Although some possible biasing influences on the rate of tooth movement, such as prescription medication, smoking and alcohol abuse, were eliminated in the patient cohort, it was uncertain whether the participants started the administration of drugs, nicotine or alcohol during the drift. Additional factors70 may also influence physiologic drift, in addition to those considered in this study, such as occlusal influences, muscle pressure, drift of the lower dentition, and mandible growth. For patients with different patterns of malocclusion, it is difficult to control these factors and explore their influence on physiologic drift with this sample size. Hence, further research with a larger sample size and more comprehensive analysis is needed.

Despite these limitations, this study explored the continuous and specific three-dimensional characteristics of physiologic drift of the upper arch following tooth extraction and assessed some factors influencing the drift. We believed that it had certain clinical value in orthodontics and could fill the gaps of previous studies to some degree.

Conclusion

All the measured teeth showed a similar tipping movement toward the extraction spaces, leading to a decrease of the extraction spaces. The maxillary first molars and canines tended to move into the spaces at a similar speed, indicating that the mesial drift of molars after premolar extraction may cause molar anchorage loss to some degree and should be prevented as soon as possible after premolar extraction in cases in which maximum control of molar anchorage is needed. Moreover, the pattern of physiologic drift of maxillary canines after premolar extraction helps relieve crowding and labially ectopic canine alignment. Additionally, drift time, age and crowding can influence physiologic drift. Physiologic drift tended to slow over time. In younger patients, posterior teeth tended to drift mesially at a faster rate and the extraction spaces tended to close faster. Crowding may have a positive effect on the drift of canines and space closure, but sex and the angle classification did not significantly affect drift.

Methods

Research design and selection of participants

This study was designed to explore the 3D characteristics of physiologic drift of the upper arch following maxillary first premolar extraction and associated factors. To gain as many generalizable results as possible, we planned to evaluate teenage and young adult (Under 30) patients, who made up the largest group of patients seeking orthodontic treatment in our department. For these patients, the decisions on bilateral maxillary first premolar extraction were made by senior orthodontists. To reduce the possible bias, the patients were enrolled based on the following inclusion criteria: (1) permanent dentition, (2) no molar crossbite or buccal crossbite, (3) no orthodontic history, (4) no congenital missing teeth, and (5) a complete crown. The exclusion criteria were as follows: (1) systemic disease, including chronic or metabolic diseases requiring the long-term administration of prescription medication, (2) congenital craniofacial deformity and syndromes, including cleft lip and palate, (3) maxillary surgical history or trauma history, (4) impacted teeth, (5) moderate to severe gingivitis or periodontal disease, (6) periapical periodontitis of the posterior teeth, and (7) smoking or alcohol abuse.

There were 1,527 patients in total who started treatment in our department between October 2015 and September 2018. Six hundred fourteen patients underwent bilateral maxillary first premolar extraction, and 116 of them met the inclusion criteria. The observation time was from the extraction sites generated to the day for fixed appliance bonding. Different drift durations were determined for each patient, ensuring that their treatment was not affected. Because the observation could probably extend the period of treatment, finally 45 patients (Asians, 10 male and 35 female) agreed to be the subjects (Fig. 2). As a preliminary study, there were no relevant data to refer to when deciding the sample size. In some relevant research, the sample size was 13 to 502832,35,37,40, while no researcher explained how the study size was determined. To obtain as much data as possible, we decided to enroll all the available patients. This study was approved by the institutional review board of Peking University School of Stomatology (PKUSSIRB-201310072). Written informed consent was obtained from all the subjects before the study. The methods were carried out in accordance with the relevant guidelines and regulations.

Figure 2.

Figure 2

Flow chart detailing the patient selection process.

Data acquisition

For each patient, the pre-treatment cast (T0) was obtained prior to extraction and the inter-observation casts (Tx) were obtained after extraction and before fixed appliance bonding. The dental and periodontal status of each patient was monitored by dentists during the observation. Next, 120 dental casts (45 casts at T0 and 75 casts at Tx) were obtained and scanned with a 3D dental scanner (R700 linear laser scanner; 3shape Corp., Denmark) and were virtually constructed into digital casts using the Rapidform 2006 program (Inus Technology, Korea). Crowding prior to extraction in each patient was measured using Proffit’s method71 and was recorded in millimeters.

Three-dimensional measurement

The T0 and Tx digital casts were superimposed via stable palatal region superimposition47 (Fig. 3a,b). Because bilateral premolar extraction was not conducted at the same time, the tooth displacement and drift duration on both sides were analyzed separately (thus, there were 150 extraction sides at Tx, and the average drift duration was 81.66 ± 70.03 days). Unilateral crowding prior to extraction (from the most mesial point of incisor to the most distal point of the first molar) was measured71. The definitions of the reference points, lines, and planes (some were based on Cho et al.48) (Fig. 4, Table 4) were set for measurement. The coordinate systems of the digital casts in different periods were unified based on the digital casts at T0. In cases with fixed-point error, the fixed reference point of each tooth was transferred to the identified tooth on the other digital cast during the next period (Fig. 3c,d). The 3D tooth measurement data, including tooth angulation, inclination, rotation, mesiodistal displacement, vertical displacement, and extraction space closure, were measured for each cast after superimposition (Fig. 4, Table 4). The variables were measured 3 times by 1 examiner over a 2-week interval. Changes in all the above-mentioned variables between each Tx and the corresponding T0 (Tx − T0) were recorded as the raw data. The directions of the changes were as follows: angulation: mesial tipping (+) or distal tipping (−); inclination: labioversion (+) or linguoversion (−); rotation: mesial inward rotation (+) or distal inward rotation (−); mesiodistal displacement: mesial movement (+) or distal movement (−); vertical displacement: extrusion (+) or intrusion (−); extraction space closure: space increase (+) or space decrease (−).

Figure 3.

Figure 3

Three-dimensional superimposition method used in this research. (a) Medial 2/3 of the palatal region between the third rugae and line in contact with the distal surface of the bilateral maxillary first molars. (b) Two digital casts at different periods (gray and red) superimposed at the stable palatal region47. (c) The marked points are bonded to the copied crown. (d) The digital shell of the target tooth (blue) was transferred to the digital cast of the next period and was well-matched with the identified tooth (red).

Figure 4.

Figure 4

Measurements of the tooth 3D information. (ac) Reference points, lines, and planes defined on a digital cast: (d) angulation; (e) inclination; (f) rotation; (g) mesiodistal displacement; (h) vertical displacement; (i) extraction space closure.

Table 4.

Definitions and abbreviations of the reference point/line/plane and measurements of tooth movement.

Definition
Reference point/line/plane
Gingival point (G) the lowest and most concave point in the gingival margin of the clinical crown
Occlusal point (O) the cusp tip of the canine and premolar; the most concave point of the buccal marginal ridge of the molar
Mesial point (M) the most mesial point of the central fissure on the occlusal surface; for canines, this is the mesial end of the segment, representing the maximum mesiodistal dimension from the occlusal view
Distal point (D) the most distal point of the central fissure on the occlusal surface; for canines, this is the distal end of the segment, representing the maximum mesiodistal dimension from the occlusal view
Facial axis (FACC) the facial axis of the clinical crown; the segment connecting G and O
FA point (FA) midpoint of the FACC
Occlusal plane* (OP) the plane established by the midpoints of the right and left incisal edges and mesiobuccal cusp tips of the right and left first molars
Unilateral posterior mesiodistal plane* (UMDP) the plane passing the foot of M of the first premolar and D of the first molar at the OP, perpendicular to the OP; the M of the second premolar is used if the first premolar is severely dislocated
Unilateral posterior buccopalatal plane* (UBPP) the plane passing the foot of D of the first molar at the OP, perpendicular to the OP and UMDP
G’ point (G’) the projection of G on the OP
Measurements of tooth movement (TXT0)**
Angulation (U6a, U5a, U3a) the projection of the angle between FACC and GG’ on UMDP
Inclination (U6i, U5i, U3i) the projection of the angle between FACC and GG’ on UBPP
Rotation (U6r, U5r, U3r) the angle between the projection of MD on OP and UMDP
Mesiodistal displacement (U6m, U5m, U3m) the distance between FA and UMDP

Vertical displacement

(U6v, U5v, U3v)

the distance between FA and UBPP

Extraction space

closure (SC)

the distance between D of the canine and M of the second premolar

*All reference planes were set based on the pre-treatment dental casts.

**U6 for first molar, U5 for second premolar, U3 for canine.

Statistical analysis and methods

Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) for the measurements of the angular variable, linear variable, and space closure were computed to assess intra-examiner reliability (repeatability). The results were 0.94, 0.91, and 0.95 for measurements of the angles, the linear distances, and extraction space closure, respectively. Because the assessment showed an excellent ICC value72, the first measurement was used.

The characteristics of the 150 extraction sites at TX were summarized based on descriptive statistics, and the data were used for further analyses.

First, the Pearson’s correlation coefficients between all the changes in the variables and durations of drift (days) were calculated to test the significance of the change over time. Next, the markedly changed variables were selected for further analyses.

Changes in the selected variables between Tx and T0 were grouped based on the months (30 days as a month, rounded up to the nearest number) of drift at Tx. Thus, they were divided into 7 groups, including 1-month to 6-month groups, and the over 6-month group. The average significant changes in each month was calculated to create a line chart to directly observe the amount and tendency of drift.

The average velocity of movement over 1 month (VX = SX*30/T; V: average velocity; S: change in the angular or linear variable; T: days between extraction and observation, 30 days as a month; X: variable of tooth movement) was calculated. Two-tailed single-sample t-test was used to test the significance of the velocity (Test Value: 0), and the 95% confidence interval was calculated.

Multiple linear regression was used to explore the influences of different factors including sex,age, angle classification, crowding, and drift duration on the velocity of the physiologic drift. The average velocity was chosen as the dependent variable and certain other factors were chosen as the independent variables. For each velocity, the angle classification (a categorical variable) was set as a dummy variable and was entered first. A forward stepwise linear regression procedure was then performed for the other factors.

The results of the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test showed that all the data were approximately normally distributed. Statistical significance was determined at the 1% and 5% levels of confidence. We used IBM SPSS Statistics 22 (IBM, Inc., Armonk, NY, USA) for statistical analyses.

Acknowledgements

We thank the patients who participated in this research.

Author Contributions

F.T. contributed to the design, data acquisition, analysis, interpretation and drafting of the manuscript. F.D. contributed to the design and data acquisition. H.C. contributed to the drafting of the manuscript. R.J. and T.X. contributed to the concept and critically revised the manuscript. All the authors reviewed and approved the final manuscript.

Data Availability

The datasets generated and analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Competing Interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Footnotes

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

References

  • 1.Weinstein S, et al. On an Equilibrium Theory of Tooth Position. Angle Orthod. 1963;33:1–26. [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Proffit WR. Equilibrium theory revisited: factors influencing position of the teeth. Angle Orthod. 1978;48:175–186. doi: 10.1043/0003-3219(1978)048<0175:ETRFIP>2.0.CO;2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Tweed, C. H. Indications for the extraction of teeth in orthodontic procedure. Am. J. Orthod. Oral Surg. 42, 22–45(1944–1945). [PubMed]
  • 4.Begg PR. Differential force in orthodontic treatment. Am. J. Orthod. 1956;42:481–510. doi: 10.1016/0002-9416(56)90175-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Proffit WR. Forty-year review of extraction frequencies at a university orthodontic clinic. Angle Orthod. 1994;64:407. doi: 10.1043/0003-3219(1994)064<0407:FROEFA>2.0.CO;2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Bernstein L, Edward H. Angle versus Calvin S. Case: extraction versus nonextraction. Part I. Historical revisionism. Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop. 1992;102:464–470. doi: 10.1016/S0889-5406(12)80001-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Bernstein L, Edward H. Angle versus Calvin S. Case: Extraction versus nonextraction. Part II. Historical revisionism. Am J Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop. 1992;102:546–551. doi: 10.1016/0889-5406(92)70072-I. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Saatci P, Yukay F. The effect of premolar extractions on tooth-size discrepancy. Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop. 1997;111:428. doi: 10.1016/S0889-5406(97)80025-X. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Kim TK, Kim JJ, Yang WS, Baek SH. First or second premolar extraction effects on facial vertical dimension. Angle Orthod. 2005;75:177–182. doi: 10.1043/0003-3219(2005)075<0173:FOSPEE>2.0.CO;2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Williams R, Hosila FJ. The effect of different extraction sites upon incisor retraction. Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop. 1976;69:388–410. doi: 10.1016/0002-9416(76)90208-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Castro ND. Second-premolar extraction in clinical practice. Am. J. Orthod. 1974;65:115–137. doi: 10.1016/0002-9416(74)90174-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Bourdet, M. Researches et Observations. Sur toutes les parties de’l art du Dentiste, Paris 1957.
  • 13.Murphey WH. Oxytetracycline microfluorescent comparison of orthodontic retraction into recent and healed extraction sites. Am. J. Orthod. 1970;58:215–239. doi: 10.1016/0002-9416(70)90086-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Moss JP, Picton DC. Experimental mesial drift in adult monkeys (Macacairus) Arch. Oral Bio. 1967;12:1313–1320. doi: 10.1016/0003-9969(67)90168-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Picton DC. The part played by the transseptal fibre system in experimental approximal drift of the cheek teeth of monkeys (Macaca irus) Arch. Oral Bio. 1973;18:669–680. doi: 10.1016/0003-9969(73)90002-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Picton DC, Moss JP. The effect of reducing cusp height on the rate of approximal drift of cheek teeth in adult monkeys (Macaca irus) Arch. Oral Bio. 1978;23:219–223. doi: 10.1016/0003-9969(78)90220-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Picton DC, Moss JP. The effect on approximal drift of altering the horizontal component of biting force in adult monkeys (Macaca irus) Arch. Oral Bio. 1980;25:45–48. doi: 10.1016/0003-9969(80)90154-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Moss JP, Picton DC. Short-term changes in the mesiodistal position of teeth following removal of approximal contact in the monkey Macaca fascicularis. Arch. Oral Bio. 1982;27:273–278. doi: 10.1016/0003-9969(82)90062-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Beek HV, Fidler VJ. An experimental study of the effect of functional occlusion on mesial tooth migration in Macaque monkeys. Arch. Oral Bio. 1977;22:269–271. doi: 10.1016/0003-9969(77)90112-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Van BH. The transfer of mesial drift potential along the dental arch in Macaca irus: an experimental study of tooth migration rate related to the horizontal vectors of occlusal forces. Eur. J. Orthod. 1979;1:125–129. doi: 10.1093/ejo/1.2.125. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.King GJ, Keeling SD, McCoy EA, Ward TH. Measuring dental drift and orthodontic tooth movement in response to various initial forces in adult rats. Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop. 1991;99:456–465. doi: 10.1016/S0889-5406(05)81579-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Robinson JA, Schneider BJ. Histological evaluation of the effect of transseptal fibre resection on the rate of physiological migration of rat molar teeth. Arch. Oral Bio. 1992;37:371. doi: 10.1016/0003-9969(92)90020-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Roux D, Chambas C, Normand B, Woda A. Analysis of tooth movement into an extraction space in the rat. Arch. Oral Bio. 1990;35:17–22. doi: 10.1016/0003-9969(90)90108-M. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Roux D, Meunier C, Woda A. A biometric analysis in the rat of the horizontal component of physiological tooth migration and its response to altered occlusal function. Arch. Oral Bio. 1993;38:957–963. doi: 10.1016/0003-9969(93)90108-X. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Roux D, Woda A. Biometric analysis of tooth migration after approximal contact removal in the rat. Arch. Oral Bio. 1994;39:1023–1027. doi: 10.1016/0003-9969(94)90053-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Alexander RG. The Vari-simplex discipline. Part 3: extraction treatment. J. Clin. Orthod. 1983;17:537–547. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Xu, T. M. Physiologic Anchorage Control: A New Orthodontic Concept and its Clinical Application. (ed. Xu, T. M.) 103–119 (Springer, 2017).
  • 28.Campbell-Wilson M. Preliminary Investigation into the Movement of the Lower Labial Segment Following Loss of First Premolars. Br. J. Orthod. 1975;2:25–28. doi: 10.1179/bjo.2.1.25. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Stephens CD. The Rate of Spontaneous Closure at the Site of Extracted Mandibular First Premolars. Br. J. Orthod. 1983;10:93–97. doi: 10.1179/bjo.10.2.93. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Stephens CD, Houston WJ. Facial growth and lower premolar extraction space closure. Eur. J. Orthod. 1985;7:157–162. doi: 10.1093/ejo/7.3.157. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Papandreas SG, Buschang PH, Alexander RG, Kennedy DB, Koyama I. Physiologic drift of the mandibular dentition following first premolar extractions. Angle Orthod. 1993;63:127. doi: 10.1043/0003-3219(1993)063<0127:PDOTMD>2.0.CO;2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Swessi DM, Stephens CD. The spontaneous effects of lower first premolar extraction on the mesio-distal angulation of adjacent teeth and the relationship of this to extraction space closure in the long term. Eur. J. Orthod. 1993;15:503–511. doi: 10.1093/ejo/15.6.503. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Gragg KL, Shugars DA, Bader JD, Elter JR, White BA. Movement of Teeth Adjacent to Posterior Bounded Edentulous Spaces. J. Dent. Res. 2001;80:2021–2024. doi: 10.1177/00220345010800111401. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Alexandros KT, Johnston LE. Class II malocclusion: The aftermath of a “perfect storm”. Semin. Orthod. 2014;20:59–73. doi: 10.1053/j.sodo.2013.12.006. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Weber AD. A longitudinal analysis of premolar enucleation. Am. J. Orthod. 1969;56:394–402. doi: 10.1016/S0002-9416(69)80006-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Glauser R. An evaluation of serial extraction among Navajo Indian Children. Am. J. Orthod. 1973;63:622–632. doi: 10.1016/0002-9416(73)90187-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Mamopoulou A, Hägg U, Schröder U, Hansen K. Agenesis of mandibular second premolars. Spontaneous space closure after extraction therapy: A 4-year follow-up. Eur J. Orthod. 1996;18:589–600. doi: 10.1093/ejo/18.6.589. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Shugars DA, Bader JD, Phillips SW, White BA, Brantley CF. The consequences of not replacing a missing posterior tooth. J. Am. Dent. Assoc. 2000;131:1317–1323. doi: 10.14219/jada.archive.2000.0385. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Aquilino SA, Shugars DA, Bader JD, White BA. Ten-year survival rates of teeth adjacent to treated and untreated posterior bounded edentulous spaces. J. Am. Dent. Assoc. 2001;85:455–460. doi: 10.1067/mpr.2001.115248. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Park K, Jung DW, Kim JY. Three-dimensional space changes after premature loss of a maxillary primary first molar. Int. J. Pediatr. Dent. 2009;19:383–389. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-263X.2009.00990.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Love W. Tooth movement into edentulous areas. J. Prosthet. Dent. 1971;25:271–278. doi: 10.1016/0022-3913(71)90188-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Kiliaridis S, Lyka I, Friede H, Ahlqwist M. Vertical Position, Rotation, and Tipping of Molars Without Antagonists. Int. J. Prosthodont. 2000;13:480–486. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Angle EH. Classification of malocclusion. Dent. Cosmos. 1899;41:248–264. [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Cha BK, Lee JY, Jost-Brinkmann PG, Yoshida N. Analysis of tooth movement in extraction cases using three-dimensional reverse engineering technology. Eur J Orthod. 2007;29:325–331. doi: 10.1093/ejo/cjm019. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Talaat S, et al. Validity and reliability of three-dimensional palatal superimposition of digital dental models. Eur J Orthod. 2017;39:365–370. doi: 10.1093/ejo/cjx008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Choi JI, Cha BK, Jost-Brinkmann PG, Choi DS, Jang IS. Validity of palatal superimposition of 3-dimensional digital models in cases treated with rapid maxillary expansion and maxillary protraction headgear. Korean J. Orthod. 2012;42:235–242. doi: 10.4041/kjod.2012.42.5.235. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Chen G, et al. Stable region for maxillary dental cast superimposition in adults, studied with the aid of stable miniscrews. Orthod. Craniofac. Res. 2011;14:70–79. doi: 10.1111/j.1601-6343.2011.01510.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.Cho MY, Choi JH, Lee SP, Baek SH. Three-dimensional analysis of the tooth movement and arch dimension changes in Class I malocclusions treated with first premolar extractions: A guideline for virtual treatment planning. Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop. 2010;138:747–757. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2008.11.033. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Kusters ST, Kuijpers-Jagtman AM, Maltha JC. An Experimental Study in Dogs of Transseptal fiber Arrangement between Teeth which have emerged in rotated or non-rotated positions. J. Dent. Res. 1991;70:192–197. doi: 10.1177/00220345910700030701. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Gould MS, Picton DC. A study of pressures exerted by the lips and cheeks on the teeth of subjects with Angle’s Class II Division 1, Class II Division 2 and Class III malocclusions compared with those of subjects with normal occlusions. Arch. Oral Bio. 1968;13:527–541. doi: 10.1016/0003-9969(68)90113-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Jacobs RM. Muscle equilibrium: fact or fancy. Angle Orthod. 1969;39:11. doi: 10.1043/0003-3219(1969)039<0011:MEFOF>2.0.CO;2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Sachiko O, Yutaka H, Aya H, Hitoshi K, Hiroyuku I. Lip and cheek resting pressure on the maxillary dentition in adults with normal occlusion. Orthod. Waves. 2008;67:54–59. doi: 10.1016/j.odw.2008.01.003. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Southard TE, Behrents RG, Tolley EA. The anterior component of occlusal force Part 1.Measurement and distribution. Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop. 1989;96:493–500. doi: 10.1016/0889-5406(89)90116-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Southard TE, Behrents RG, Tolley EA. The anterior component of occlusal force. Part 2. Relationship with dental malalignment. Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop. 1990;97:41–44. doi: 10.1016/S0889-5406(05)81707-X. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Kole H. Surgical operations on the alveolar ridge to correct occlusal abnormalities. Oral Sur. Oral Med. Oral Pathol. 1959;12:515–529. doi: 10.1016/0030-4220(59)90153-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Park HS, Lee YJ, Jeong SH, Kwon TG. Density of the alveolar and basal bones of the maxilla and the mandible. Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop. 2008;133:30–37. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.01.044. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57.Göz G. The age dependence of the tissue reaction in tooth movements. Fortschr Kiefer orthop. 1990;51:4–7. doi: 10.1007/BF02165205. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58.Kyomen S, Tanne K. Influences of aging changes in proliferative rate of PDL cells during experimental tooth movement in rats. Angle Orthod. 1997;67:67–72. doi: 10.1043/0003-3219(1997)067<0067:IOACIP>2.3.CO;2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59.Li X, et al. Age-related effects on osteoclastic activities after orthodontic tooth movement. Bone Joint Res. 2016;5:492–499. doi: 10.1302/2046-3758.510.BJR-2016-0004.R2. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 60.Bridges T, King G, Mohammed A. The effect of age on tooth movement and mineral density in the alveolar tissues of the rat. Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop. 1988;93:245–250. doi: 10.1016/S0889-5406(88)80010-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 61.Kirschneck C, et al. Interactive effects of periodontitis and orthodontic tooth movement on dental root resorption, tooth movement velocity and alveolar bone loss in a rat model. Ann Anat. 2017;210:32–43. doi: 10.1016/j.aanat.2016.10.004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 62.Graber TM, Kaineg TF. The mandibular third molar: its predictive status and role in lower incisor crowding. Proc. Finn. Dent. Soc. 1981;77:37–44. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 63.Richardson ME. The role of the third molar in the cause of late lower arch crowding: A review. Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop. 1989;95:79–83. doi: 10.1016/0889-5406(89)90139-X. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 64.Makrygiannakis MA, Kaklamanos EG, Athanasiou AE. Does common prescription medication affect the rate of orthodontic tooth movement? A systematic review. Eur. J. Orthod. 2018;40:649–659. doi: 10.1093/ejo/cjy001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 65.Kirschneck C, Maurer M, Wolf M, Reicheneder C, Proff P. Regular nicotine intake increased tooth movement velocity, osteoclastogenesis and orthodontically induced dental root resorptions in a rat model. Int. J. Oral Sci. 2017;9:174–184. doi: 10.1038/ijos.2017.34. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 66.De Araujo CM, Johann AC, Camargo ES, Tanaka OM. The effects of binge-pattern alcohol consumption on orthodontic tooth movement. Dental Press J Orthod. 2014;19:93–98. doi: 10.1590/2176-9451.19.6.093-098.oar. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 67.Kirschneck C, Proff P, Reicheneder C, Lippold C. Short-term effects of systematic premolar extraction on lip profile, vertical dimension and cephalometric parameters in borderline patients for extraction therapy–a retrospective cohort study. Clin Oral Investig. 2016;20:865–874. doi: 10.1007/s00784-015-1574-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 68.Kouvelis G, Dritsas K, Doulis I, Kloukos D, Gkantidis N. Effect of orthodontic treatment with 4 premolar extractions compared with nonextraction treatment on the vertical dimension of the face: A systematic review. Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop. 2018;154:175–187. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2018.03.007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 69.Iared W, Mariko KDSE, Iared W, Rufino Macedo C. Esthetic perception of changes in facial profile resulting from orthodontic treatment with extraction of premolars: A systematic review. J. Am. Dent. Assoc. 2017;148:9–16. doi: 10.1016/j.adaj.2016.09.004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 70.Craddock HL, Youngson CC, Manogue M, Blance A. Occlusal Changes Following Posterior Tooth Loss in Adults. Part 2. Clinical Parameters Associated with Movement of Teeth Adjacent to the Site of Posterior Tooth Loss. J. Prosthodont. 2007;16:495–501. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-849X.2007.00223.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 71.Proffit, W. R., Fields, H. W. & Sarver, D. M. Contemporary Orthodontics. 195–196 (Mosby, 2007).
  • 72.Landis J, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 1977;33:159–174. doi: 10.2307/2529310. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Data Availability Statement

The datasets generated and analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.


Articles from Scientific Reports are provided here courtesy of Nature Publishing Group

RESOURCES