ABSTRACT
ABSTRACT Introduction: Temporary anchorage devices (TADs) have been developed to be used as direct adjuncts in orthodontic treatment and have facilitated treatment of more complex orthodontic cases, including patients with dental impaction. Objectives: This clinical case reports the applicability of TADs in the orthodontic treatment of a patient with impacted mandibular second molars. Surgical and orthodontic procedures related to the use of miniplates were also discussed in this study. Conclusions: The use of temporary anchorage devices, such as miniplates, can be suggested as an alternative to treat patients with impacted mandibular second molars.
RESUMO Introdução: os dispositivos de ancoragem temporária vêm sendo desenvolvidos para uso como coadjuvantes no tratamento ortodôntico. Esses dispositivos facilitam o tratamento ortodôntico de casos mais complexos, incluindo pacientes com dentes impactados. Objetivos: o presente relato de caso reporta a aplicabilidade dos dispositivos de ancoragem temporária no tratamento ortodôntico de um paciente com segundos molares inferiores impactados. Os procedimentos cirúrgicos e ortodônticos relacionados ao uso das miniplacas também são discutidos nesse estudo. Conclusões: o uso de dispositivos de ancoragem temporária, tais como as miniplacas, pode ser sugerido como uma alternativa no tratamento de pacientes com segundos molares inferiores impactados.
Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Adolescent , Orthodontics, Corrective/instrumentation , Orthodontic Appliance Design , Orthodontic Anchorage Procedures/instrumentation , Radiology , Tooth, Impacted/therapy , Tooth, Impacted/diagnostic imaging , Miniaturization , Molar/diagnostic imagingABSTRACT
Aim: The aim of this study was to evaluate the dimensional stability of autogenous and xenogenous bone blocks after grafting procedures using cone beam computed tomography Material and Methods: Autogenous (n=6) and xenogeneic (n=7) bone graft blocks were evaluated after 8 (T1) and 16 (T2) months. A dimensional analysis was carried using linear measurements of the height and thickness of the blocks in the tomographic exam. Results: For the autogenous bone blocks, there was a reduction in height of 1.42mm (10.06%) and a reduction in mean thickness of 1.24mm (29.60%). For the xenogeneic bone blocks, the mean height reduction was 1.38mm (10.02%) and the mean thickness reduction was 0.97mm (18.81%) with remodeling (26.62%). However, there were no significant differences between the xenogeneic and autogenous bone blocks (p=0.366). Conclusions: The results showed no differences in the dimensional stability of autogenous or xenogenous bone graft blocks. However, clinical and experimental studies with longer follow up periods are needed to elucidate the mechanisms involved in the remodeling process of bone grafts.