Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add filters








Year range
1.
Dental press j. orthod. (Impr.) ; 24(4): 63-72, Jul.-Aug. 2019. tab
Article in English | LILACS | ID: biblio-1019795

ABSTRACT

ABSTRACT Objective: The purpose of this study was to establish the association between sagittal and vertical skeletal patterns and assess which cephalometric variables contribute to the possibility of developing skeletal Class II or Class III malocclusion. Methods: Cross-sectional study. The sample included pre-treatment lateral cephalogram radiographs from 548 subjects (325 female, 223 male) aged 18 to 66 years. Sagittal skeletal pattern was established by three different classification parameters (ANB angle, Wits and App-Bpp) and vertical skeletal pattern by SN-Mandibular plane angle. Cephalometric variables were measured using Dolphin software (Imaging and Management Solutions, Chatsworth, Calif, USA) by a previously calibrated operator. The statistical analysis was carried out with Chi-square test, ANOVA/Kruskal-Wallis test, and an ordinal multinomial regression model. Results: Evidence of association (p< 0.05) between sagittal and vertical skeletal patterns was found with a greater proportion of hyperdivergent skeletal pattern in Class II malocclusion using three parameters to assess the vertical pattern, and there was more prevalent hypodivergence in Class III malocclusion, considering ANB and App-Bpp measurements. Subjects with hyperdivergent skeletal pattern (odds ratio [OR]=1.85-3.65), maxillary prognathism (OR=2.67-24.88) and mandibular retrognathism (OR=2.57-22.65) had a significantly (p< 0.05) greater chance of developing skeletal Class II malocclusion. Meanwhile, subjects with maxillary retrognathism (OR=2.76-100.59) and mandibular prognathism (OR=5.92-21.50) had a significantly (p< 0.05) greater chance of developing skeletal Class III malocclusion. Conclusions: A relationship was found between Class II and Class III malocclusion with the vertical skeletal pattern. There is a tendency toward skeletal compensation with both vertical and sagittal malocclusions.


RESUMO Objetivo: o objetivo do presente estudo foi estabelecer a relação entre os padrões esqueléticos sagitais e verticais, e avaliar quais variáveis esqueléticas podem influenciar na chance de desenvolver uma má oclusão de Classe II ou de Classe III esquelética. Métodos: foi feito um estudo transversal, cuja amostra incluiu radiografias cefalométricas laterais pré-tratamento de 548 pacientes (325 mulheres, 223 homens), com idades entre 18 e 66 anos. O padrão esquelético sagital foi estabelecido por meio de três parâmetros distintos de classificação (ângulo ANB, Wits, App-Bpp); e o padrão esquelético vertical, por meio do ângulo SN.Plano Mandibular. As variáveis cefalométricas foram aferidas utilizando-se o software Dolphin (Imaging and Management Solutions, Chatsworth, Calif, EUA) por um avaliador previamente calibrado. A análise estatística foi realizada por meio do teste qui-quadrado, teste ANOVA/Kruskal-Wallis e modelo de regressão multinomial ordinal. Resultados: foram encontradas evidências de associação significativa (p< 0,05) entre os padrões esqueléticos sagitais e verticais, com maior proporção do padrão esquelético hiperdivergente nas más oclusões de Classe II, segundo os três parâmetros utilizados. Na Classe III, houve maior proporção do padrão esquelético hipodivergente, considerando-se os parâmetros ANB e App-Bpp. Pacientes com padrões esqueléticos hiperdivergentes (odds ratio [OR] = 1,85 - 3,65), prognatismo maxilar (OR=2,67 - 24,88) e retrognatismo mandibular (OR=2,57 - 22,65) apresentaram chance significativamente maior (p< 0,05) de desenvolver má oclusão esquelética de Classe II. Por outro lado, pacientes com retrognatismo maxilar (OR=2,76 - 100,59) e prognatismo mandibular (OR=5,92 - 21,50) apresentaram uma chance significativamente maior (p< 0,05) de desenvolver má oclusão esquelética de Classe III. Conclusões: Foi encontrada uma associação entre as más oclusões de Classe II e Classe III e o padrão esquelético vertical. Há uma tendência à compensação esquelética tanto nas más oclusões verticais quanto nas sagitais.


Subject(s)
Humans , Male , Female , Adolescent , Adult , Middle Aged , Aged , Young Adult , Malocclusion , Malocclusion, Angle Class II , Malocclusion, Angle Class III , Cephalometry , Cross-Sectional Studies , Mandible , Maxilla
2.
CES odontol ; 23(2): 9-16, jul.-dic. 2010. ilus, tab
Article in Spanish | LILACS | ID: lil-612558

ABSTRACT

Introducción y Objetivo: La exactitud de la información contenida en la ranura de los brackets preajustados permite obtener control y precisión de los movimientos dentarios; sin embargo losfabricantes no proveen el margen de error de los brackets. El objetivo fue determinar la variación enel torque y la angulación de brackets de la prescripción MBT de cuatro diferentes casas comerciales.Materiales y Métodos: Se midieron de 55 brackets de cuatro casas comerciales: 3M® Unitek, Monrovia, Calif: Gemini M.B.T; Dentaurum® Pforzheim, Germany: Equilibrium 2 M.B.T; Aditek® Grabilnhos, São Paulo Brazil: Vector M.B.T; Morelli® Perdizes São Paulo, SP: M.B.T system, entotal 220 brackets. El rango de tolerancia establecido fue de ±0.5º para el torque y de ±0.2º para la angulación. Para la medición se utilizó un proyector de perfiles Prazis® 50X. Resultados: Lospromedios de torque de las marcas Morelli® y Aditek® se desviaron del rango de tolerancia con diferencias estadisticamente significativas (p=0); Dentaurum® (p=0,31) y 3M Unitek® (p=0,30) estuvieron dentro del rango; las cuatro casas comerciales mostraron diferencias estadísticamentesignificativas entre sus promedios de torque (prueba ANOVA p<0.05). Los promedios de angulación sedesviaron del rango de tolerancia, excepto la marca Morelli® (p=0,11); 3M UNITEK® y DENTAURUM no presentaron diferencias estadísticamente significativas entre sus promedios de angulación (pruebaANOVA p=0,98). Conclusiones: Se presenta variación en torque y angulación de los brackets delas cuatro casas comerciales. Esta variación es menor para los brackets DENTAURUM® y 3M.


Introduction and Objective: Although it is important for orthodontists to know the accuracy of information contained in the pre-adjusted slot brackets for control and precision of tooth movement,manufacturers do not provide the margin of error built in the different values in these brackets. Theobjective of this study was to compare the torque and angle means of brackets of four different commercial brands with the original MBT prescription. Materials and Methods: A sample of 55brackets of each brand was taken: 3M® Unitek, Monrovia, Calif. : line Gemini M. B. T - Dentaurum® Pforzheim, Germany: line Equilibrium 2 M. B. T - Aditek® Grabilnhos, Sao Paulo Brazil: line Vector M. B. T - Morelli® Perdizes Sao Paulo, SP: line M. B. T system, for a total of 220 brackets. Theestablished range of tolerance was nominal value ±0.5 to the torque and ±0.2° to the angle. Bracketmeasurement was done with a Prazis ® 50X optical comparator. Results: Torque average values for the brand marks Morelli and Aditek were distant from the nominal value; 3M Unitek valueswere found within the range with no statistically significant differences. All four brands showed statistically significant differences between torque average values (test ANOVA (p<0,05)). With regards to angulations averages all were outside the range of tolerance except for Morelli (p=0,11).3M, UNITEK® and DENTAURUM® brackets showed no statistically significant differences betweenangle average values (ANOVA (p=0,985)). Conclusions: A large variability for both the torque andangulations values for all four brands. This variability was less for Equilibrium 2 MBT (Dentaurum)and Gemini MBT (3MUnitek) brackets.


Subject(s)
Humans , Orthodontic Appliances , Torque
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL