Search

Copyright of Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics is the property of Dental Press International and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Clinical Orthodontics is the property of Dental Press International and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Clinical Orthodontics is the property of Dental Press International and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics is the property of Dental Press International and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Revista Saúde is the property of Revista Saude and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Revista Clínica de Ortodontia Dental Press is the property of Dental Press International and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The present study on orthodontic root resorption addresses factors associated to root resorption occurrences and reports some procedures that must be followed before and during orthodontic treatment. Factors related to patients and technical procedures are closely linked to the occurrence of this pathology. Some other procedures as: periapical radiographs of anterior tooth; following- up periapical radiographs of the anterior teeth after six months of treatment; if the resorption was diagnosed, treatment discontinuance from 60-90 days and reevaluation required to continue the treatment, are very important and must be considered with each and every patient undergoing orthodontic treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Treatment of anterior open bite in adults is a great challenge to the orthodontist. When the open bite is skeletal, it increases the difficulty of its correction and stability of the results at the end of treatment. Surgical-orthodontic treatment may be an option for the correction of this malocclusion, although many patients refuse this treatment option and prefer the compensatory treatment. This work aims to report a case of severe open bite, treated with orthodontic compensation, extraction of four first molars and use of anterior intermaxillary elastics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The aim of this study was to cephalometrically assess the skeletal and dentoalveolar effects of Class II malocclusion treatment performed with the Jones Jig appliance followed by fixed appliances. Methods: The sample comprised 25 patients with Class II malocclusion treated with the Jones Jig appliance followed by fixed appliances, at a mean initial age of 12.90 years old. The mean time of the entire orthodontic treatment was 3.89 years. The distalization phase lasted for 0.85 years, after which the fixed appliance was used for 3.04 years. Cephalograms were used at initial (T1), post-distalization (T2) and final phases of treatment (T3). For intragroup comparison of the three phases evaluated, dependent ANOVA and Tukey tests were used. Results: Jones Jig appliance did not interfere in the maxillary and mandibular component and did not change maxillomandibular relationship. Jones Jig appliance promoted distalization of first molars with anchorage loss, mesialization and significant extrusion of first and second premolars, as well as a significant increase in anterior face height at the end of treatment. The majority of adverse effects that occur during intraoral distalization are subsequently corrected during corrective mechanics. Buccal inclination and protrusion of mandibular incisors were identified. By the end of treatment, correction of overjet and overbite was observed. Conclusions: Jones Jig appliance promoted distalization of first molars with anchorage loss represented by significant mesial movement and extrusion of first and second premolars, in addition to a significant increase in anterior face height. Keywords: Malocclusion. Angle Class II. Corrective Orthodontics. Tooth movement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To compare the acceptability and effectiveness of topical and infiltration anesthesia for placement of mini-implants used as temporary anchorage devices. Methods: The sample comprised 40 patients, 17 males and 23 females, whose mean age was 26 years old and who were all undergoing orthodontic treatment and in need for anchorage reinforcement. Mini-implants were bilaterally placed in the maxilla of all individuals, with infiltration anesthesia on one side and topical anesthesia on the other. These 40 patients completed two questionnaires, one before and another after mini-implant placement and pain was measured through a visual analog scale (VAS). The data collected were analyzed using descriptive statistics and the measurements of pain were compared by means of the non-parametric test of Mann-Whitney. Results: It was found that 60% of patients felt more comfortable with the use of topical anesthesia for mini-implant placement; 72.5% of patients described the occurrence of pressure during placement of the anchorage device as the most unpleasant sensation of the entire process; 62.5% of patients felt more pain with the use of topical anesthesia. Conclusion: It was concluded that patients had less pain with the use of infiltration anesthesia, and also preferred this type of anesthetic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To compare, through computed tomography, alveolar bone thickness changes at the maxillary incisors area during orthodontic treatment with and without tooth extraction. Methods: Twelve patients were evaluated. They were divided into 2 groups: G1 - 6 patients treated with extraction of right and left maxillary first premolars, with mean initial age of 15.83 years and mean treatment length of 2.53 years; G2 - 6 patients treated without extraction, with mean initial age of 18.26 years and mean treatment length of 2.39 years. Computed tomographies, lateral cephalograms and periapical radiographs were used at the beginning of the treatment (T2) and 18 months after the treatment had started (T2). extraction Space closure occurred in the extraction cases. Intragroup and intergroup comparisons were performed by dependent and independent t test, respectively. Results: In G1, the central incisor was retracted and uprighted, while in G2 this tooth showed vestibularization. Additionally, G1 presented a higher increase of labial alveolar bone thickness at the cervical third in comparison with G2. The incidence of root resorption did not present significant differences between groups. Conclusion: There were no changes in alveolar bone thickness when extraction and nonextraction cases were compared, except for the labial alveolar bone thickness at the cervical third of maxillary incisors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The objective of this study was to evaluate dentoskeletal effects in the treatment of Class II malocclusion performed with the Herbst appliance in patients at post-peak stage of growth. Methods: The sample consisted of 16 patients with Class II malocclusion and average initial and final ages of 14.04 (ranging from 11.50 to 35.66) and 17.14 (ranging from 13.68 to 38.64) years, respectively, who were treated for an mean time of 2.52 years. Lateral cephalograms were obtained at treatment onset (T1) and completion (T2) to evaluate the effects of therapy. Initial dental casts were also used to evaluate the overjet and the anteroposterior severity of molar relationship at treatment onset. The cephalometric changes between initial and final stages were compared by means of the non-parametric Wilcoxon test. Results: The results showed that the Herbst appliance did not promote significant changes in the maxillary component and the effective length of the mandible significantly increased without improving the maxillomandibular relationship. Changes in the maxillary and mandibular dentoalveolar components revealed that the maxillary incisors exhibited retrusion and lingual tipping, while the mandibular incisors presented increased protrusion and buccal tipping. The dental relationships exhibited significant improvements with the treatment. Conclusion: Based on the present results, it was concluded that the effects of treatment performed with the Herbst appliance in patients at post-peak stage of growth are predominantly of dentoalveolar nature. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the cephalometric alterations in patients with Angle Class II division 1 malocclusion, orthodontically treated with extraction of two maxillary premolars. Methods: The sample comprised 68 initial and final lateral cephalograms of 34 patients of both gender (mean initial age of 14.03 years and mean final age of 17.25 years), treated with full fixed appliances and extraction of the first maxillary premolars. In order to evaluate the alterations due the treatment between initial and final phases, the dependent t test was applied to the studied cephalometric variables. Results: The dentoskeletal alterations due to extraction of two maxillary premolars in the Class II division 1 malocclusion were: maxillary retrusion, improvement of the maxillomandibular relation, increase of lower anterior face height, retrusion of the maxillary incisors, buccal inclination, protrusion and extrusion of the mandibular incisors, besides the reduction of overjet and overbite. The tissue alterations showed decrease of the facial convexity and retrusion of the upper lip. Conclusions: The extraction of two maxillary premolars in Class II division 1 malocclusion promotes dentoskeletal and tissue alterations that contribute to an improvement of the relation between the bone bases and the soft tissue profile. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The purpose of this retrospective study was to evaluate long-term stability of maxillary incisors alignment in cases submitted to non-extraction orthodontic treatment. Methods: The sample comprised 23 patients (13 female; 10 male) at a mean initial age of 13.36 years (SD = 1.81 years), treated with fixed appliances. Dental cast measurements were obtained at three different time points (T1-pretreatment, T2-posttreatment and T3-long-term posttreatment). Variables assessed in maxillary arch were Little Irregularity Index, intercanine, interpremolar and intermolar widths, arch length and perimeter. The statistical analysis was performed by one-way ANOVA and Tukey tests when necessary. Pearson' correlation coefficients were used to investigate possible associations between the variables evaluated. Results: There was no significant change in most arch dimension measurements during and after treatment, however, during the long-term posttreatment period, it was observed a significant maxillary incisors crowding relapse. Conclusion: The maxillary incisors irregularity increased significantly (1.52 mm) during long-term posttreatment. None of the clinical factors studied demonstrated to be predictive of the maxillary crowding relapse. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the stability of molar relationship after non-extraction treatment of Class II malocclusion. Methods: The sample comprised 39 subjects (16 females, 23 males) with initial Class II malocclusion treated with no extractions, using fixed appliances. Mean age at the beginning of treatment was 12.94 years, at the end of treatment was 15.14 years and at post-retention stage was 21.18 years. Mean treatment time was 2.19 years and mean time of post-treatment evaluation was 6.12 years. To verify the influence of the severity of initial Class II molar relationship in stability of molar relationship, the sample was divided into two groups, one presenting a 1/2-cusp or 3/4-cusp Class II molar relationship, and the other with full-cusp Class II molar relationship. In dental casts from initial, final and post-retention stages, molar, first and second premolars and canine relationships were measured. Data obtained were analyzed by dependent ANOVA, Tukey and Pearson's correlation tests, as well as independent t test between the two groups divided by severity of initial molar relationship. Results: There was a non-statistically significant 0.12 mm relapse of molar relationship. The initial severity of Class II molar relationship was not correlated to relapse in the post-retention period. When compared, the two groups showed no difference in relapse of molar relationship. Conclusion: It was concluded that correction of Class II molar relationship is stable and initial severity does not influence relapse of molar relationship. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics is the property of Dental Press International and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Objective: The aims of this study were to describe the patterns of maxillary incisor angulation in patients with upper interincisive diastemas, to evaluate angulation changes with treatment and posttreatment period, and to assess whether there are association between incisor angulation and interincisive diastema relapse. Methods: The sample comprised 30 Class I or Class II patients with at least one pretreatment anterior diastema of 0.77 mm or greater after eruption of maxillary permanent canines. Data were obtained from panoramic radiographs at pretreatment, posttreatment and at least 2 years post-retention. Results: Incisors presented a mesial tipping tendency after treatment, but only lateral incisors showed significant changes between pre and posttreatment stages. Conclusion: Regarding post-retention period, no changes were found. Finally, no relation was found between diastema relapse and maxillary incisor axial angulation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of UNINGÁ Review is the property of UNINGA Review and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This article describes a clinical case of a 20-year-old patient with an extremely severe Class III malocclusion. Compensatory orthodontics was not possible, so surgical preparation for Orthognathic Surgery was chosen. Pre-surgical orthodontic alignment and leveling were performed, followed by the Orthognathic Surgery. The case was finalized with a significant improvement in profile, facial aesthetics, and dental appearance. The descriptors include Orthognathic Surgery, Angle Class III malocclusion, and Corrective Orthodontics. [Extracted from the article]