139 resultados para Soil vapour extraction
Resumo:
Introduction: The objectives of this investigation were to compare the initial cephalometric characteristics of complete Class II Division 1 malocclusions treated with 2 or 4 premolar extractions and to verify their influence on the occlusal success rate of these treatment protocols. Methods: A sample of 98 records from patients with complete Class II Division 1 malocclusion was divided into 2 groups with the following characteristics: group 1 consisted of 55 patients treated with 2 maxillary first premolar extractions at an initial mean age of 13.07 years; group 2 included 43 patients treated with 4 premolar extractions, with an initial mean age of 12.92 years. Initial and final occlusal statuses were evaluated on dental casts with Grainger`s treatment priority index (TPI), and the initial cephalometric characteristics were obtained from the pretreatment cephalograms. The initial cephalometric characteristics and the initial and final occlusal statuses of the groups were compared with the t test. A multiple regression analysis was used to evaluate the influence of all variables in the final TPI. Results: The 2-premolar extraction protocol provided a statistically smaller TPI and consequently a better occlusal success rate than the 4-premolar extraction protocol. The 4-premolar extraction group had statistically smaller apical base lengths, more vertical facial growth patterns, and greater hard- and soft-tissue convexities at pretreatment than the 2-premolar extraction group. However, the multiple regression analysis showed that only the extraction protocol was significantly associated with the final occlusal status. Conclusions: The initial cephalometric characteristics of the groups did not influence the occlusal success rate of these 2 treatment protocols.
Resumo:
Introduction: In premolar extraction cases, root parallelism is recommended to preserve the stability of space closures. The influence of the degree of root parallelism on relapse of tooth extraction spaces has been a controversial topic in the literature. The aim of this study was to compare the angle between the long axes of the canine and the second premolarin patients with and without stability of extraction-space closures. Methods: A sample of 56 patients, treated with 4 premolar extractions, was divided into 2 groups: group 1, consisting of 25 patients with reopening of extraction spaces; and group 2, consisting of 31 patients without reopening of extraction spaces. Panoramic radiographs of each patient were analyzed at the posttreatment and 1-year posttreatment stages. The data were statistically analyzed by using chi-square tests, t tests, analysis of variance (ANOVA), and Pearson correlation coefficients. Results: The results showed that the groups did not differ regarding the angle between the canine and the second premolar, and there was no correlation between angular changes and reopening of extraction spaces, showing that dental angular changes are not determining factors for relapse, and other factors should be investigated. Conclusions: The final angle and the posttreatment changes observed in the angle between the long axes of the canine and the second premolar showed no influence on the relapse of extraction spaces. (Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2011; 139: e505-e510)
Resumo:
This case report describes a Class I crowded malocclusion with an ankylosed maxillary central incisor that was in infraocclusion and labially displaced. The patient had wide maxillary teeth, and the option of extracting the maxillary central incisors followed by space closure, with lateral incisors substituting for the central incisors, was chosen. (Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2010;138:510-7)
Resumo:
In this study, 53 patients received piroxicam, administered orally or sublingually, after undergoing removal of symmetrically positioned lower third molars, during two separate appointments. This study used a randomized, blind, cross-over protocol. Objective and subjective parameters were recorded for comparison of postoperative results for 7 days after surgery. Patients treated with oral or sublingual piroxicam reported low postoperative pain scores. The patients who received piroxicam orally took a similar average amount of analgesic rescue medication compared with patients who received piroxicam sublingually (p > 0.05). Patients exhibited similar values for mouth opening measured just before surgery and immediately following suture removal 7 days later (p > 0.05), and showed no significant differences between routes of piroxicam administration for swelling control during the second or seventh postoperative days (p > 0.05). In summary, pain, trismus and swelling after lower third molar extraction, independent of surgical difficulty, could be controlled by piroxicam 20 mg administered orally or sublingually and no significant differences were observed between the route of delivery used in this study.