Treatment stability in patients with Class II malocclusion treated with 2 maxillary premolar extractions or without extractions

Introduction: The purpose of this study was to compare the occlusal stability of Class II malocclusion treatment with and without extraction of 2 maxillary premolars. Methods: A sample of 59 records from patients with complete Class II malocclusion was used. This sample was divided into 2 groups with the following characteristics: group 1, comprising 29 patients treated without extractions, and group 2, comprising 30 patients treated with extraction of 2 maxillary premolars. Dental cast measurements were obtained before and after treatment and at a minimum of 2.4 years after treatment. The pretreatment, posttreatment, and postretention occlusal statuses were evaluated with the peer assesment rating index. The occlusal indexes at the postretention stage and the posttreatment changes and percentages of posttreatment changes were compared with t tests. Results: The nonextraction and the 2 maxillary premolar extraction treatment protocols of complete Class II malocclusions had no statistically significant differences in occlusal stability. Conclusions: Finishing Class II malocclusion treatment with the molars in a Class II relationship has similar occlusal stability as finishing with the molars in a Class I relationship. (Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2010;138:16-22)

Influence of rapid palatal expansion on maxillary incisor alignment stability

Introduction: The purpose of this retrospective study was to compare the long-term stability of maxillary incisor alignment in patients treated with and without rapid maxillary expansion (RME). Methods: The sample comprised 48 subjects with Class I and Class II malocclusions, treated without extractions with fixed edgewise appliances, divided into 2 groups according to the treatment protocol: group 1 comprised 25 patients (15 girls, 10 boys) at a mean initial age of 13.53 years (SD, 1.63), who had RME during orthodontic treatment. Group 2 comprised 23 patients (13 girls, 10 boys) at a mean initial age of 13.36 years (SD, 1.81 years), treated with fixed appliances without RME. Maxillary dental cast measurements were obtained at the pretreatment, posttreatment, and long-term posttreatment stages. Variables assessed were the irregularity index and maxillary arch dimensions. Intergroup comparisons were made with independent t tests. Results: Greater transverse increases were found during treatment in the group treated with RME. However, during the long-term posttreatment period, no significant difference was observed in the amount of incisor crowding relapse between the groups. Conclusions: RME did not influence long-term maxillary anterior alignment stability. (Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2010; 137: 164. e1-164.e6)

Stability and relapse of maxillary anterior crowding treatment in Class I and Class II Division 1 malocclusions

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)

Posttreatment and physiologic occlusal changes comparison

Objective: To compare posttreatment and postretention occlusal changes with the physiologic occlusal changes caused by natural development of untreated subjects. Materials and Methods: The sample was divided into three groups. Group 1 comprised 97 subjects treated with four premolar extractions at a mean pretreatment (T0) age of 13.03 years, a mean posttreatment (T1, first observation) age of 15.12 years, and a mean postretention (T2, second observation) age of 20.52 years. The mean observation period (T2-T1) was 5.39 years. Group 2 comprised 58 subjects treated nonextraction at a mean pretreatment age of 12.83 years, a mean posttreatment age of 14.99 years, a mean postretention age of 20.22 years, and a mean observation period of 5.22 years. Group 3 comprised 114 untreated subjects at a mean age at T1 of 14.91 years and at T2 of 20.48 years. The mean observation period was 5.56 years. Dental casts were evaluated using the Peer Assessment Rating (PAR) index and the Little irregularity index in maxillary and mandibular arches. Changes in PAR and Little indexes were compared among the three groups by analysis of variance and Tukey tests. Results: Intergroup comparison showed that at T1 and T2 the treated groups presented smaller PAR and Little indexes than the untreated group. In the observation period, the treated groups showed greater increase in PAR and Little maxillary indexes than the untreated group. The extraction group showed a greater increase of the Little mandibular index than the untreated group. Conclusions: The treated groups showed more changes according to PAR and Little maxillary indexes than the untreated group. The posttreatment change of the mandibular anterior crowding of the treated extraction group was greater than the mandibular crowding caused by physiologic changes in the untreated group