[
1. Upadhyay M, Yadav S, Nagaraj K, Patil S. Treatment effects of miniimplants for en-masse retraction of anterior teeth in bialveolar dental protrusion patients: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2008;134:18-29.e1.10.1016/j.ajodo.2007.03.025
]Search in Google Scholar
[
2. Renfroe EW. The factor of stabilization in anchorage. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1956;42:86-97.10.1016/0002-9416(56)90189-0
]Search in Google Scholar
[
3. Costa A, Raffainl M, Melsen B. Miniscrews as orthodontic anchorage: a preliminary report. Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg 1998;13:201-9
]Search in Google Scholar
[
4. Sandler J, Murray A, Thiruvenkatachari B, Gutierrez R, Speight P, O’Brien K. Effectiveness of 3 methods of anchorage reinforcement for maximum anchorage in adolescents: A 3-arm multicenter randomized clinical trial. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2014;146:10-20.10.1016/j.ajodo.2014.03.02024974994
]Search in Google Scholar
[
5. Benson PE, Tinsley D, O’Dwyer JJ, Majumdar A, Doyle P, Sandler PJ. Midpalatal implants vs headgear for orthodontic anchorage—a randomized clinical trial: cephalometric results. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2007;132:606-15.10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.01.04018005834
]Search in Google Scholar
[
6. Creekmore TD, Eklund MK. The possibility of skeletal anchorage. J Clin Orthod 1983;17:266-9.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
7. Jayaratne Y, Uribe F, Janakiraman N. Maxillary incisors changes during space closure with conventional and skeletal anchorage methods: a systematic review. J Istanb Univ Fac Dent 2017;51(3 Suppl 1):S90-S101.10.17096/jiufd.52884575083229354313
]Search in Google Scholar
[
8. Upadhyay M, Yadav S, Nanda R. Biomechanics of incisor retraction with mini-implant anchorage. J Orthod 2014;41 Suppl 1:S15-23.10.1179/1465313314Y.000000011425138361
]Search in Google Scholar
[
9. Slim K, Nini E, Forestier D, Kwiatkowski F, Panis Y, Chipponi J. Methodological index for non-randomized studies (minors): development and validation of a new instrument. ANZ J Surg 2003;73:712-6.10.1046/j.1445-2197.2003.02748.x12956787
]Search in Google Scholar
[
10. Downs SH, Black N. The feasibility of creating a checklist for the assessment of the methodological quality both of randomised and non-randomised studies of health care interventions. J Epidemiol Community Health 1998;52:377-84.10.1136/jech.52.6.37717567289764259
]Search in Google Scholar
[
11. Deguchi T, Murakami T, Kuroda S, Yabuuchi T, Kamioka H, Takano-Yamamoto T. Comparison of the intrusion effects on the maxillary incisors between implant anchorage and J-hook headgear. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2008;133:654-60.10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.04.04718456138
]Search in Google Scholar
[
12. Yao CC, Lai EH, Chang JZ, Chen I, Chen YJ. Comparison of treatment outcomes between skeletal anchorage and extraoral anchorage in adults with maxillary dentoalveolar protrusion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2008;134:615-24.10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.12.02218984393
]Search in Google Scholar
[
13. Lai EH, Yao CC, Chang JZ, Chen I, Chen YJ. Three-dimensional dental model analysis of treatment outcomes for protrusive maxillary dentition: comparison of headgear, miniscrew, and miniplate skeletal anchorage. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2008;134:636-45.10.1016/j.ajodo.2007.05.01718984395
]Search in Google Scholar
[
14. Chen M, Li ZM, Liu X, Cai B, Wang DW, Feng ZC. Differences of treatment outcomes between self-ligating brackets with microimplant and headgear anchorages in adults with bimaxillary protrusion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2015;147:465-71.10.1016/j.ajodo.2014.11.02925836006
]Search in Google Scholar
[
15. Lee AY, Kim YH. Comparison of Movement of the Upper Dentition According to Anchorage Method: Orthodontic Mini-Implant versus Conventional Anchorage Reinforcement in Class I Malocclusion. ISRN Dent 2011;2011:321206.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
16. Park HM, Kim BH, Yang IH, Baek SH. Preliminary threedimensional analysis of tooth movement and arch dimension change of the maxillary dentition in Class II division 1 malocclusion treated with first premolar extraction: conventional anchorage vs. miniimplant anchorage. Korean J Orthod 2012;42:280-90.10.4041/kjod.2012.42.6.280354244823323242
]Search in Google Scholar
[
17. Upadhyay M, Yadav S, Patil S. Mini-implant anchorage for en-masse retraction of maxillary anterior teeth: a clinical cephalometric study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2008;134:803-10.10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.10.02519061808
]Search in Google Scholar
[
18. Liu YH, Ding WH, Liu J, Li Q. Comparison of the differences in cephalometric parameters after active orthodontic treatment applying mini-screw implants or transpalatal arches in adult patients with bialveolar dental protrusion. J Oral Rehabil 2009;36:687-95.10.1111/j.1365-2842.2009.01976.x19602104
]Search in Google Scholar
[
19. Liou EJ, Chang PM. Apical root resorption in orthodontic patients with en-masse maxillary anterior retraction and intrusion with miniscrews. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2010;137:207-12.10.1016/j.ajodo.2008.02.02720152676
]Search in Google Scholar
[
20. Basha AG, Shantaraj R, Mogegowda SB. Comparative study between conventional en-masse retraction (sliding mechanics) and en-masse retraction using orthodontic micro implant. Implant Dent 2010;19:128-36.10.1097/ID.0b013e3181cc4aa520386216
]Search in Google Scholar
[
21. Al-Sibaie S, Hajeer MY. Assessment of changes following en-masse retraction with mini-implants anchorage compared to two-step retraction with conventional anchorage in patients with class II division 1 malocclusion: a randomized controlled trial. Eur J Orthod 2014;36:275-8310.1093/ejo/cjt04623787192
]Search in Google Scholar
[
22. Upadhyay M, Yadav S, Nagaraj K, Nanda R. Dentoskeletal and soft tissue effects of mini-implants in Class II division 1 patients. Angle Orthod 2009;79:240-7.10.2319/013008-52.119216590
]Search in Google Scholar
[
23. Kim SH, Hwang YS, Ferreira A, Chung KR. Analysis of temporary skeletal anchorage devices used for en-masse retraction: a preliminary study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2009;136:268-76.10.1016/j.ajodo.2007.08.02319651358
]Search in Google Scholar
[
24. Liu H, Lv T, Wang NN, Zhao F, Wang KT, Liu DX. Drift characteristics of miniscrews and molars for anchorage under orthodontic force: 3-dimensional computed tomography registration evaluation. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2011;139:e83-9.10.1016/j.ajodo.2010.07.01821195261
]Search in Google Scholar
[
25. Lee KJ, Park YC, Hwang CJ, Kim YJ, Choi TH, Yoo HM et al. Displacement pattern of the maxillary arch depending on miniscrew position in sliding mechanics. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2011;140:224-32.10.1016/j.ajodo.2010.05.02021803260
]Search in Google Scholar
[
26. Upadhyay M, Yadav S, Nagaraj K, Uribe F, Nanda R. Miniimplants vs fixed functional appliances for treatment of young adult Class II female patients: a prospective clinical trial. Angle Orthod 2012;82:294-303.10.2319/042811-302.1886793721867432
]Search in Google Scholar
[
27. Victor D, Prabhakar R, Karthikeyan MK, Saravanan R, Vanathi P, Vikram NR et al. Effectiveness of mini-implants in threedimensional control during retraction - a clinical study. J Clin Diagn Res 2014;8:227-32.
]Search in Google Scholar
[
28. Jee JH, Ahn HW, Seo KW, Kim SH, Kook YA, Chung KR et al. Enmasse retraction with a preformed nickel-titanium and stainless steel archwire assembly and temporary skeletal anchorage devices without posterior bonding. Korean J Orthod 2014;44:236-45.10.4041/kjod.2014.44.5.236419252525309863
]Search in Google Scholar
[
29. Monga N, Kharbanda OP, Samrit V. Quantitative and qualitative assessment of anchorage loss during en-masse retraction with indirectly loaded miniscrews in patients with bimaxillary protrusion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2016;150:274-82.10.1016/j.ajodo.2016.02.01427476360
]Search in Google Scholar
[
30. Kojima Y, Kawamura J, Fukui H. Finite element analysis of the effect of force directions on tooth movement in extraction space closure with miniscrew sliding mechanics. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2012;142:501-8.10.1016/j.ajodo.2012.05.01422999674
]Search in Google Scholar
