OBJECTIVE: The objective of this two-arm parallel trial was to compare the type of tooth movement during en masse retraction of the maxillary anterior teeth using labial versus lingual biocreative therapy. METHODS: Twenty-eight subjects were randomized in a 1 : 1 ratio to either the labial or lingual group. En masse anterior retraction was performed using labial biocreative therapy in group A and lingual biocreative therapy in group B. Cone beam computed tomography scans were taken before and after retraction and the primary outcome was the type of tooth movement during anterior retraction. Data were analyzed using paired t-tests for comparisons within each group and independent-sample t-test for comparison of the mean treatment changes between the two groups. RESULTS: Significant differences were found between the two groups in relation to the type of tooth movement (labiolingual inclination of the central incisor; mean difference, 5.85 ± 1.85°). The canine showed significant distal tipping in the lingual group (mean difference, 6.98 ± 1.25°). The canine was significantly more intruded in the lingual group (mean difference, 1.67 ± 0.49 mm). Good anchorage control and significant soft tissue changes occurred in both groups. No serious adverse effects were detected. CONCLUSIONS With a 10-mm retraction hook, the labial biocreative technique with the reverse curve overlay provided anterior retraction with good torque control, while in the lingual group, anterior retraction occurred with controlled tipping movement with significant distal tipping and intrusion of the canine (trial registration: The trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov [NCT03239275]).