110 resultados para Orthodontic bracket
Resumo:
Introduction: In this retrospective study, we compared the cephalometric effects, the dental-arch changes, and the efficiency of Class II treatment with the pendulum appliance, cervical headgear, or extraction of 2 maxillary premolars, all associated with fixed appliance therapy. Methods: The sample of 82 patients with Class II malocclusion was divided into 3 groups: group 1 patients (n = 22; treatment time, 3.8 years) were treated with the pendulum appliance and fixed orthodontic appliances. Group 2 patients (n = 30; treatment time, 3.2 years) were treated with cervical headgear followed by fixed appliances; group 3 patients (n = 30; treatment time, 2.1 years) were treated with 2 maxillary premolar extractions and fixed appliances. The average starting ages of the groups ranged from 13.2 to 13.8 years. Data were obtained from serial cephalometric measurements and dental casts. The dental casts were analyzed with the treatment priority index. The treatment efficiency index was also used. Results: The 3 treatment protocols produced similar cephalometric effects, especially skeletally. Comparisons among the 2 distalizing appliances (pendulum and cervical headgear) and extraction of 2 maxillary premolars for Class II treatment showed changes primarily in the maxillary dentoalveolar component and dental relationships. The facial profile was similar after treatment, except for slightly more retrusion of the upper lip in the extraction patients. The treatment priority index demonstrated that occlusal outcomes also were similar among the groups. The treatment efficiency index had higher values for the extraction group. Conclusions: The effects of treatment with the pendulum appliance or cervical headgear and extraction of 2 maxillary premolars associated with fixed appliances were similar from both occlusal and cephalometric standpoints. Class II treatment with extraction of maxillary teeth was more efficient because of the shorter treatment time. Differences in maxillary incisor retraction should be noted, but these differences might have been due to greater maxillary dentoalveolar protrusion in the extraction group before treatment. (Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2009;136:833-42)
Resumo:
Maxillary second-molar extraction in Class II malocclusion is a controversial issue in orthodontics. This treatment protocol is rigorous and not routine. In this case report, we present the orthodontic treatment of a patient with a Class II malocclusion, maxillary crowding, and no mandibular first molars, treated with extraction of the maxillary second molars. The mechanotherapy and indications of maxillary second- molar extraction are discussed. (Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2009;136:878-86)
Resumo:
Introduction: Mini-implants are placed in restricted sites, requiring an accurate surgical technique. However, no systematic study has quantified technique accuracy to reliably predict the surgical risks. Therefore, a graduated 3-dimensional radiographic-surgical guide (G-RSG) was proposed, and its inaccuracy and risk index (RI) were estimated. Methods: The sample consisted of 6 subjects (4 male, 2 female), who used mini-implant anchorage. Ten drill-free screws (DFS) were placed by using the G-RSG. The central point of the mesiodistal septum width (SW) was the selected implant site on the presurgical radiograph. The distances between DFS and the adjacent teeth (5-DFS and 6-DFS) were measured to evaluate screw centralization and inaccuracy degree (ID). These distances were statistically compared by independent t tests, and inaccuracy was determined by the expression ID = (5-DFS-6-DFS)/2, which represents deviation of the mini-implant`s final position regarding the central point initially selected. Then SW, ID, and screw diameter (SO) were combined to estimate the surgical risk with RI expressed by RI = SO/SW-ID. Results: The 5-DFS and 6-DFS distances were not significantly different. The ID of the G-RSG was 0.17 mm. The low ID ensured a safe RI (<1) in spite of the restricted SW. Conclusions: The G-RSG accuracy allowed fine prediction of the final DFS position in the inter-radicular septum, with a low RI, which is a helpful tool to estimate surgical risks. (Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2009; 136: 722-35)
Resumo:
This case report describes the nonsurgical, nonextraction therapy of a 16-year-old boy with a skeletal Class III malocclusion, a prognathic mandible, and a retrusive maxilla. He was initially classified as needing orthognathic surgery, but he and his parents wanted to avoid that. The Class III malocclusion was corrected with a rapid palatal expander and a maxillary protraction mask followed by nonextraction orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances, combined with short Class III and vertical elastics in the anterior area. The height of the maxillary alveolar process and the vertical face height were slightly increased with treatment. Class I molar and canine relationships were achieved, and the facial profile improved substantially. (Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2009; 136: 736-45)
Resumo:
Introduction: The aim of this study was to evaluate the dentoskeletal and soft-tissue effects of Class II malocclusion treatment with the Jasper jumper followed by Class II elastics at the different stages of therapy. Methods: The sample comprised 24 patients of both sexes (11 boys, 13 girls) with an initial age of 12.58 years, treated for a mean period of 2.15 years. Four lateral cephalograms were obtained of each patient in these stages of orthodontic treatment: at pretreatment (T1), after leveling and alignment (T2), after the use of the Jasper jumper appliance and before the use of Class II intermaxillary elastics (T3), and at posttreatment (T4). Thus, 3 treatment phases could be evaluated: leveling and alignment (T1-T2), use of the Jasper jumper (T2-T3), and use of Class II elastics (T3-T4). Dependent analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey tests were used to compare the durations of the 3 treatment phases and for intragroup comparisons of the 4 treatment stages. Results: The alignment phase showed correction of the anteroposterior relationship, protrusion and labial inclination of the maxillary incisors, and reduction of overbite. The Jasper jumper phase demonstrated labial inclination, protrusion and intrusion of the mandibular incisors, mesialization and extrusion of the mandibular molars, reduction of overjet and overbite, molar relationship improvement, and reduction in facial convexity. The Class II elastics phase showed labial inclination of the maxillary incisors; retrusion, uprighting, and extrusion of the mandibular incisors; and overjet and overbite increases. Conclusions: The greatest amount of the Class II malocclusion anteroposterior discrepancy was corrected with the Jasper jumper appliance. Part of the correction was lost during Class II intermaxillary elastics use after use of the Jasper jumper appliance. (Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2011;140:e77-e84)
Resumo:
Introduction: The objective of this study was to cephalometrically compare the stability of complete Class II malocclusion treatment with 2 or 4 premolar extractions after a mean period of 9.35 years. Methods: A sample of 57 records from patients with complete Class II malocclusion was selected and divided into 2 groups. Group 1 consisted of 30 patients with an initial mean age of 12.87 years treated with extraction of 2 maxillary premolars. Group 2 consisted of 27 patients with an initial mean age of 13.72 years treated with extraction of 4 premolars. T tests were used to compare the groups` initial cephalometric characteristics and posttreatment changes. Pearson correlation coefficients were calculated to determine the correlation between treatment and posttreatment dental-relationship changes. Results: During the posttreatment period, both groups had similar behavior, except that group 1 had a statistically greater maxillary forward displacement and a greater increase in the apical-base relationship than group 2. On the other hand, group 2 had a statistically greater molar-relationship relapse toward Class II. There were significant positive correlations between the amounts of treatment and posttreatment dentoalveolar-relationship changes. Conclusions: Treatment of complete Class II malocclusions with 2 maxillary premolar extractions or 4 premolar extractions had similar long-term posttreatment stability. (Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2009;136:154.e1-154.e10)
Resumo:
The objective of this study was to compare, on study models and initial cephalograms, the efficiency of Class II malocclusion treatment with the pendulum appliance, and with two maxillary premolar extraction protocol. The sample consisted of 48 treated Class II malocclusion patients: group 1 comprised 22 patients (7 males, 15 females) treated with the pendulum appliance, with an initial mean age of 14.44 years and group 2, 26 patients (14 males, 12 females) treated with two maxillary premolar extractions at an initial mean age of 13.66 years. To compare the efficiency of each treatment protocol, the occlusal outcomes were evaluated on dental casts using the Peer Assessment Rating (PAR) Index and the treatment time (TT) of each group was calculated on clinical charts. The degree of treatment efficiency was calculated as the ratio between the percentage of occlusal improvement, evaluated through the PAR index, and TT. Statistical analysis was undertaken by means of t-tests. The findings demonstrated that the two maxillary premolar extraction protocol provided the occlusal outcomes in a shorter time (group 1: 45.7 months, group 2: 23.01 months) and, therefore, demonstrated greater treatment efficiency than the pendulum appliance.
Resumo:
This case report describes the treatment of a patient with a Class II Division 1 subdivision right malocclusion with 8 congenitally missing teeth, incompetent lips, and incisor protrusion. The treatment plan included extractions and space closure with retraction of the anterior teeth; symmetric mechanics were used in the mandibular arch and asymmetric mechanics in the maxillary arch. Because of the mechanics used, some midline deviations were expected. Knowledge of diagnosis and treatment planning of asymmetric malocclusions and dental esthetics are essential for success when correcting asymmetic problems, but, even so, small clinical compromises should be expected. (Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2009; 135: 663-70)
Resumo:
Introduction: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the treatment success rate of Class II malocclusion without extractions, according to initial severity. Methods: Class II subjects (n = 276) were divided into 2 groups according to the severity of the malocclusion. Group 1 comprised 144 patients with bilateral half Class II malocclusion at the initial mean age of 12.27 years. Group 2 comprised 132 patients who initially had bilateral complete Class II malocclusion at the initial mean age of 12.32 years. The patients` initial and final study models were evaluated with Grainger`s treatment priority index. Chi-square tests were used to test for differences between the 2 groups for categorical variables. Variables regarding occlusal results were compared with independent t tests. Results: Group 1 had a significantly better final occlusal result, a shorter treatment time, and a higher treatment efficiency index. Conclusions: Based on these results, it was concluded that bilateral half Class II malocclusion has a better treatment success rate than bilateral complete Class II malocclusion when treatment is conducted without extractions. (Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2009; 135: 274.e1-274.e8)
Resumo:
Introduction: The maxillary anterior teeth are the most important to facial esthetics because they are the first to show on a smile. Therefore, stability of the maxillary anterior teeth alignment is an important issue. The objective of this study was to compare the stability of maxillary anterior tooth alignment in Class I and Class II Division 1 malocclusions. Methods: The sample comprised dental casts of 70 patients with Class I and Class II Division 1 malocclusions and a minimum of 3 mm of maxillary anterior crowding measured by an irregularity index. The patients were treated with extractions and evaluated at pretreatment and posttreatment and at least 5 years after treatment. The sample was divided into 3 groups: group 1, Class I malocclusion treated with 4 first premolar extractions comprising 30 subjects, with an initial age of 13.16 years and 8.59 mm of initial maxillary irregularity; group 2, Class II malocclusion treated with 4 first premolar extractions comprising 20 subjects, with an initial age of 12.95 years and 11.10 mm of maxillary irregularity; and group 3, Class II malocclusion treated with 2 first maxillary premolar extractions comprising 20 subjects, with an initial age of 13.09 years and 9.68 mm of maxillary irregularity. Results: The decrease in the maxillary irregularity index was significantly greater in group 2 than in group 1 during treatment. The stability of maxillary anterior alignment was 88.12% over the long term; 77% of the linear displacement of the anatomic contact points tended to return to their original positions. Conclusions: Stability of maxillary anterior alignment between the 3 groups was similar. The stability of maxillary anterior alignment was high over the long term, but a high percentage of teeth tended to return to their original positions. (Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2011; 139: 768-74)
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:
Introduction: The purpose of this study was to compare the occlusal outcomes and the efficiency of 1-phase and 2-phase treatment protocols in Class II Division 1 malocclusions. Treatment efficiency was defined as a change in the occlusal characteristics in a shorter treatment time. Methods: Class II Division 1 subjects ( n = 139) were divided into 2 groups according to the treatment protocol for Class II correction. Group 1 comprised 78 patients treated with a 1-phase treatment protocol at initial and final mean ages of 12.51 and 14.68 years. Group 2 comprised 61 patients treated with a 2-phase treatment protocol at initial and final mean ages of 11.21 and 14.70 years. Lateral cephalometric radiographs were taken at the pretreatment stage to evaluate morphological differences in the groups. The initial and final study models of the patients were evaluated by using the peer assessment rating index. Chi-square tests were used to test for differences between the 2 groups for categorical variables. Variables regarding occlusal results were compared by using independent t tests. A linear regression analysis was completed, with total treatment time as the dependent variable, to identify clinical factors that predict treatment length for patients with Class II malocclusions. Results: Similar occlusal outcomes were obtained between the 1-phase and the 2-phase treatment protocols, but the duration of treatment was significantly shorter in the 1-phase treatment protocol group. Conclusions: Treatment of Class II Division 1 malocclusions is more efficient with the 1-phase than the 2-phase treatment protocol.
Resumo:
Introduction: In this study, we evaluated the influence of intrusion mechanics with accentuated and reversed curve of Spee on root resorption of the maxillary and mandibular incisors. Methods: A sample of 60 patients with Class I and Class II Division 1 malocclusions having nonextraction treatment was divided into 2 groups with the following characteristics: group 1 comprised 30 deepbite patients, treated with accentuated and reversed curve of Spee intrusion mechanics, with an initial mean age of 12.8 +/- 1.23 years (range, 10.01-15.32 years), and group 2 comprised 30 patients with normal overbite treated without intrusion mechanics, with an initial mean age of 12.87 +/- 1.43 years ( range, 10.02-15.36 years). Pretreatment and posttreatment periapical radiographs were used to evaluate root resorption. The groups were compared by using the Mann-Whitney U test. Correlation between root resorption and tooth movement was investigated with the Spearman correlation coefficient. Results: The deepbite group treated with accentuated and reversed curve of Spee had statistically greater root resorption ( 1.87) than the normal overbite group ( 1.54), at P=.017. Changes in overbite and vertical displacements of the maxillary central incisor apices had significant correlations to root resorption ( r = 0.30, P =.019; r = 0.27, P =.037, respectively). Conclusions: Accentuating and reversing the curve of Spee in the archwires to correct deep overbite causes more root resorption than nonintrusive mechanics.