Single arch treatment in class II div 1 malocclusion

Orthodontic treatment can improve mastication, speech and appearance, as well as overall health, comfort, and self-esteem. However, like many other interventions, orthodontic treatment has inherent risks and complications. Best way to avoid orthodontic treatment complications is to stay away from orthodontic appliances. Thus, if correcting malocclusion is to be of benefit, the advantages it offers should outweigh any possible damage. It is also important to implement risk control procedures during and after orthodontic treatment. Patient selection always plays a vital role in minimizing risks. In this article two cases illustrate the effective treatment in class 2 div 1 malocclusion with single arch treatment. This approach may reduce risk of orthodontic treatment. Observational Study. This study was conducted at the Orthodontics Dept., Islam Dental College, Sialkot. She 22 year old female having history of thumb sucking presented with class II incisors, canines and molars relationship on skeletal class II bases and convex profile. She also have anterior dental open bite with low vertical skeletal relationship.[pre-treatment photographs a-f]. All teeth are erupted except 3[rd] molars at [OPG][Pre-treatment radiographs I]. Cephalometrically Skeletal class 2 with low angle and bimaxillary dental proclination [Pre-treatment radiographs j]. Single arch treatment can be use in selected class 2 cases, where lower arch can be accepted as such, which can give maximum wanted effects of esthetic and function with minimum treatment

Association of maxillary transverse discrepancy and impacted maxillary canines

The maxillary permanent canine acts as the corner stone of occlusion and plays a key role in smile design. Any morphological defect or eruption anomaly, affecting the maxillary permanent canine has a negative impact on the smile and facial esthetics of the person. The etiology of impacted maxillary permanent canine is multifactorial. Maxillary transverse discrepancies have been reported in 7-23% of the population. The objective of this study was to assess the association between maxillary transverse discrepancy and impacted permanent maxillary canines. The study was carried out at the Armed Forces Institute of Dentistry. After obtaining informed written consent from all patients, 60 casts of skeletal class I patients with complete permanent dentition except third molars were selected from the records of the Orthodontics department; 30 with impacted maxillary canines for the experimental group and 30 without any impacted teeth for the control group. The maxillary arch width was measured as the distance between the mesiopalatal cusp tips of the first permanent molars. The mandibular arch width was measured as the distance between the central fossae of the mandibular first permanent molars. The difference between the two measurements was calculated to determine maxillary transverse discrepancy. A positive [r = 0.341] and highly significant [p < 0.01] association was observed between maxillary transverse discrepancy and impacted maxillary permanent canines. Early correction of maxillary transverse discrepancy may reduce the chances of maxillary permanent canine impaction