Curative effect evaluation by using Andrews' six elements for completed orthodontic treatment cases / 华西口腔医学杂志

OBJECTIVES@#To assess the treatment outcome of patients who completed their orthodontic treatment by using Andrews' six elements and the American Board of Orthodontic (ABO) objective grading system (OGS); to determine whether Andrews' six elements can be used as a new assessment system for patients who completed their orthodontic treatment.@*METHODS@#A total of 160 patients who completed their orthodontic treatment were included in the study. The participants were randomly selected from patients who completed their orthodontic procedures in Kunming Medical University Affiliated Stomatological Hospital during the period of 2015 to 2019. The retrospective completed cases were examined in accordance with the Andrews' six elements and ABO measuring scales. Scores were assigned to each tooth in each category. All the measurement items in both evaluation criteria, the composite category score, and the total score were calculated. The passing and potential passing rates of the completed cases were compared with two measuring scales via the Chi-square test.@*RESULTS@#The passing rate for the evaluation of cases by using the Andrews' six elements measuring scale was 83.8%, and that for the evaluation of cases by using the ABO measuring scale was 86.3%. The differences in achieving the standard between the cases of Andrews' six elements and ABO-OGS via the Chi-square test were statistically insignificant (@*CONCLUSIONS@#The performance of Andrews' six elements was comparable with that of ABO-OGS in assessing the treatment outcome of patients who completed their orthodontic treatment. Andrews' six elements can be used as a new system for assessing the treatment outcome of patients who completed their orthodontic treatment. It demonstrated particular advantage in controlling facial profile, and had just completed material of patients who completed their orthodontic treatment it can measure. The Andrews' six elements measuring scale is convenient to disseminate and use.

Maxillary incisors initial position and soft-tissue changes in Class II malocclusion extraction protocols / Posição inicial dos incisivos superiores e alterações no perfil facial nos protocolos de extração da má oclusão de Classe II

Introdução: Diferenças da atratividade encontradas entre os protocolos de tratamento Classe II em longo prazo e no pós-tratamento incitou estes estudos. O Elemento II demonstrou que os rostos bem equilibrados tem incisivos superiores posicionados em um relacionamento anteroposterior individualmente calculado com a testa. Deste modo, o Elemento II foi utilizado para investigar as características iniciais dos pacientes. Além disso, para avaliar as mudanças que os protocolos de extrações resultam nos tecidos moles, uma revisão sistemática foi realizada com busca nas bases de dados PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Scopus e Cochrane. Resultados: O grupo CII teve posição AP dos incisivos superiores mais anteriores quando comparado ao grupo NO. Além disso, as posições AP dos incisivos nos subgrupos de extração foram à frente, quando comparado com o subgrupo NE. Alterações dos tecidos moles estatisticamente significantes foram ângulo nasolabial (NLA) que aumentou de 2,4º a 5,40º no protocolo de extração de 2 pré-molares e de 1º a 6,84º no protocolo de extração de 4 pré-molares. Retrusão dos lábios superior e inferior também foram verificadas, com menor retração do lábio inferior nos grupos de extração de dois pré-molares. Conclusões: Indivíduos com Classe II apresentaram os incisivos superiores significativamente mais protruídos que os indivíduos com oclusão normal. Na Classe II divisão 1, o subgrupo tratado com extrações apresentaram os incisivos significativamente mais protruídos em comparação com o subgrupo sem extrações. Quando Classe II divisão 1 é tratada com extrações de pré-molares, há aumento do NLA e os lábios são retraídos. No entanto, há menor retração do lábio inferior no protocolo de extração de 2 prémolares superiores.(AU)

Introduction: Differences in long-term and posttreatment attractiveness between Class II treatment protocols motivated these studies. Element II demonstrated that well-balanced faces have maxillary incisors positioned in an individually calculated anteroposterior relationship with the forehead. Thus, it was used to investigate the initial characteristics of the patients. Moreover, to evaluate the soft-tissue changes with extraction protocols, a systematic review was performed searching PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Scopus and Cochrane electronic databases. Results: The CII group had forward incisors AP position when compared to the NO group. Also, the incisors AP positions in the extraction subgroups were forward when compared to the NE subgroup. Statistically significant soft-tissue changes reported included nasolabial angle (NLA) increasing from 2.4 to 5.40 degrees in the 2-premolar extraction protocol and from 1 to 6.84 degrees in the 4-premolar extraction protocol. Retrusion of the upper and lower lips were also verified, with less retraction of the lower lip in the 2-premolar extraction group. Conclusions: Class II subjects presented the maxillary incisors significantly more protruded than normal occlusion subjects. Class II division 1 extraction subgroups demonstrated significantly more protruded incisors as compared to the non-extraction subgroup. When Class II division 1 malocclusion is treated with premolar extractions, the NLA increases and the lips are retracted. However, there is less retraction of the lower lip in the 2- maxillary premolar extraction protocol.(AU)