5 resultados para Maloclusão de Angle Classe II
em BORIS: Bern Open Repository and Information System - Berna - Suiça
Resumo:
OBJECTIVES: This study reports the secondary analysis of a randomized-controlled clinical trial designed to assess the efficacy of deproteinized bovine mineral and a collagen membrane in the treatment of intrabony defects. The specific aims of this report are (1) to analyse the radiographic bone changes 1 year after therapy and (2) to assess the association between radiographic defect angle and treatment outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Baseline and 12-month radiographs were collected from 120 patients with advanced chronic periodontitis from 10 centres in seven countries as part of a multi-centre clinical trial. All patients had at least one intrabony defect > or =3 mm in depth. The treatment consisted of simplified or modified papilla preservation flaps to access the defect. After debridement of the area, a deproteinized bovine mineral and a collagen membrane were applied in the test subjects, and omitted in the controls. Main outcome measures were radiographic bone fill and defect resolution 1 year after surgery. RESULTS: One hundred and twenty pairs of radiographs were obtained, of which 110 pairs were measurable (57 tests and 53 controls). One year after treatment, radiographic resolution of the intrabony component was significantly higher in the test group (3.2+/-1.7 mm) when compared with the controls (1.7+/-1.9 mm). Multivariate analysis indicated that the treatment and the baseline radiographic depth of the intrabony defect significantly influenced the radiographic bone fill of the intrabony defect 1 year following treatment. The percentage of resolution of the defect was influenced by the treatment provided and the baseline plaque score. The baseline radiographic defect angle did not show a significant impact on the clinical and radiographic outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Regenerative periodontal surgery with a deproteinized bovine bone mineral and a collagen membrane offered additional benefits in terms of radiographic resolution of the intrabony defect and predictability of outcomes with respect to papilla preservation flaps alone.
Resumo:
INTRODUCTION Our objective was to investigate potential associations between maxillary sinus floor extension and inclination of maxillary second premolars and second molars in patients with Class II Division 1 malocclusion whose orthodontic treatment included maxillary first molar extractions. METHODS The records of 37 patients (18 boys, 19 girls; mean age, 13.2 years; SD, 1.62 years) treated between 1998 and 2004 by 1 orthodontist with full Begg appliances were used in this study. Inclusion criteria were white patients with Class II Division 1 malocclusion, sagittal overjet of ≥4 mm, treatment plan including extraction of the maxillary first permanent molars, no missing teeth, and no agenesis. Maxillary posterior tooth inclination and lower maxillary sinus area in relation to the palatal plane were measured on lateral cephalograms at 3 time points: at the start and end of treatment, and on average 2.5 years posttreatment. Data were analyzed for the second premolar and second molar inclinations by using mixed linear models. RESULTS The analysis showed that the second molar inclination angle decreased by 7° after orthodontic treatment, compared with pretreatment values, and by 11.5° at the latest follow-up, compared with pretreatment. There was evidence that maxillary sinus volume was negatively correlated with second molar inclination angle; the greater the volume, the smaller the inclination angle. For premolars, inclination increased by 15.4° after orthodontic treatment compared with pretreatment, and by 8.1° at the latest follow-up compared with baseline. The volume of the maxillary sinus was not associated with premolar inclination. CONCLUSIONS We found evidence of an association between maxillary second molar inclination and surface area of the lower sinus in patients treated with maxillary first molar extractions. Clinicians who undertake such an extraction scheme in Class II patients should be aware of this potential association and consider appropriate biomechanics to control root uprighting.
Resumo:
AIM To compare dentoskeletal and soft tissue treatment effects of two alternative Class II division 1 treatment modalities (maxillary first permanent molar extraction versus Herbst appliance). METHODS One-hundred-fifty-four Class II division 1 patients that had either been treated with extractions of the upper first molars and a lightwire multibracket (MB) appliance (n = 79; 38 girls, 41 boys) or non-extraction by means of a Herbst-MB appliance (n = 75; 35 girls, 40 boys). The groups were matched on age and sex. The average age at the start of treatment was 12.7 years for the extraction and for 13.0 years for the Herbst group. Pretreatment (T1) and posttreatment (T2) lateral cephalograms were retrospectively analyzed using a standard cephalometric analysis and the sagittal occlusal analysis according to Pancherz. RESULTS The SNA decrease was 1.10° (p = 0.001) more pronounced in the extraction group, the SNB angle increased 1.49° more in the Herbst group (p = 0.000). In the extraction group, a decrease in SNB angle (0.49°) was observed. The soft tissue profile convexity (N-Sn-Pog) decreased in both groups, which was 0.78° more (n. s.) pronounced in the Herbst group. The nasolabial angle increased significantly more (+ 2.33°, p = 0.025) in the extraction group. The mechanism of overjet correction in the extraction group was predominantly dental (65% dental and 35% skeletal changes), while in the Herbst group it was predominantly skeletal (58% skeletal and 42% dental changes) in origin. CONCLUSION Both treatment methods were successful and led to a correction of the Class II division 1 malocclusion. Whereas for upper first molar extraction treatment more dental and maxillary effects can be expected, in case of Herbst treatment skeletal and mandibular effects prevail.
Resumo:
OBJECTIVE To assess the maxillary second molar (M2) and third molar (M3) inclination following orthodontic treatment of Class II subdivision malocclusion with unilateral maxillary first molar (M1) extraction. MATERIALS AND METHODS Panoramic radiographs of 21 Class II subdivision adolescents (eight boys, 13 girls; mean age, 12.8 years; standard deviation, 1.7 years) before treatment, after treatment with extraction of one maxillary first molar and Begg appliances and after at least 1.8 years in retention were retrospectively collected from a private practice. M2 and M3 inclination angles (M2/ITP, M2/IOP, M3/ITP, M3/IOP), constructed by intertuberosity (ITP) and interorbital planes (IOP), were calculated for the extracted and nonextracted segments. Random effects regression analysis was performed to evaluate the effect on the molar angulation of extraction, time, and gender after adjusting for baseline measurements. RESULTS Time and extraction status were significant predictors for M2 angulation. M2/ITP and M2/IOP decreased by 4.04 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -6.93, 1.16; P = .001) and 3.67 (95% CI: -6.76, -0.58; P = .020) in the extraction group compared to the nonextraction group after adjusting for time and gender. The adjusted analysis showed that extraction was the only predictor for M3 angulation that reached statistical significance. M3 mesial inclination increased by 7.38° (95% CI: -11.2, -3.54; P < .001) and 7.33° (95% CI: -11.48, -3.19; P = .001). CONCLUSIONS M2 and M3 uprighting significantly improved in the extraction side after orthodontic treatment with unilateral maxillary M1 extraction. There was a significant increase in mesial tipping of maxillary second molar crowns over time.
Resumo:
OBJECTIVE To evaluate the long-term effects of asymmetrical maxillary first molar (M1) extraction in Class II subdivision treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS Records of 20 Class II subdivision whites (7 boys, 13 girls; mean age, 13.0 years; SD, 1.7 years) consecutively treated with the Begg technique and M1 extraction, and 15 untreated asymmetrical Class II adolescents (4 boys, 11 girls; mean age, 12.2 years; SD, 1.3 years) were examined in this study. Cephalometric analysis and PAR assessment were carried out before treatment (T1), after treatment (T2), and on average 2.5 years posttreatment (T3) for the treatment group, and at similar time points and average follow-up of 1.8 years for the controls. RESULTS The adjusted analysis indicated that the maxillary incisors were 2.3 mm more retracted in relation to A-Pog between T1 and T3 (β = 2.31; 95% CI; 0.76, 3.87), whereas the mandibular incisors were 1.3 mm more protracted (β = 1.34; 95% CI; 0.09, 2.59), and 5.9° more proclined to the mandibular plane (β = 5.92; 95% CI; 1.43, 10.41) compared with controls. The lower lip appeared 1.4 mm more protrusive relative to the subnasale-soft tissue-Pog line throughout the observation period in the treated adolescents (β = 1.43; 95% CI; 0.18, 2.67). There was a significant PAR score reduction over the entire follow-up period in the molar extraction group (β = -6.73; 95% CI; -10.7, -2.7). At T2, 65% of the subjects had maxillary midlines perfectly aligned with the face. CONCLUSIONS Unilateral M1 extraction in asymmetrical Class II cases may lead to favorable occlusal outcomes in the long term without harming the midline esthetics and soft tissue profile.