The influence of varying maxillary central incisor vertical dimension on perceived smile aesthetics.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate patient perception of the smile focused on analysis of the upper incisors. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: Department of Clinical and Social Dentistry at Federal University of Paraíba, João Pessoa, Brazil. PARTICIPANTS: The sample consisted of 135 individuals (73 women and 62 men). METHODS: Images with different characteristics associated with the incisal edges were shown at random and analysed using a Likert scale. Data were analysed using the Chi-square test or Fisher's exact test with a statistically significant difference ( P < 0.05). RESULTS: Smile I (difference of 1.5 mm in relation to the central incisor and lateral) was considered the most aesthetic, while Smile III (no difference in height between the central and lateral incisors) was the least aesthetic. A significant difference was found between perception of smile II (difference of 1 mm in relation to the central incisor and lateral) and age groups ( P < 0.005), with 31% (n = 13) of individuals aged 45-64 years considering smile II as not pleasant, 4.4% (n = 2) aged 15-24 years and 8.3% (n=4) aged 25-44 years and 4.4% (n = 2) aged 15-24 years considering the same. A significant difference was also found in relation to educational background of the assessor and smile perception, with smile III ( P = 0.0441) and smile IV ( P = 0.0053) considered the most aesthetic ( P = 0.0116). CONCLUSION: The smile considered most attractive among the sample was that with 1.5 mm steepness between the central and lateral incisors, while a flat smile arc was considered least attractive.

Treatment effects of the Jasper Jumper and the Bionator associated with fixed appliances.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of Class II malocclusion treatment with the Jasper Jumper and the Bionator, associated with fixed appliances. METHODS: The sample comprised 77 young individuals divided into 3 groups: Group 1 consisted of 25 patients treated with the Jasper Jumper appliance associated with fixed appliances for a mean period of 2.15 years; group 2 had 30 patients, treated with the Bionator and fixed appliances, for a mean treatment time of 3.92 years; and the control group included 22 subjects followed for a mean period of 2.13 years. The initial and final lateral cephalograms of the patients were evaluated. Intergroup comparison at the initial stage and of the treatment changes were performed by analysis of variance. RESULTS: Their effects consisted in a restrictive effect on the maxilla, a slight increase in anterior face height, retrusion and extrusion of the maxillary incisors, labial tipping and protrusion of the mandibular incisors in both groups and intrusion with the Jasper Jumper appliance, maxillary molar distalization with the Jasper Jumper, extrusion and mesialization of the mandibular molars, both appliances provided significant improvement of the maxillomandibular relationship, overjet, overbite and molar relationship. CONCLUSIONS: The effects of both appliances in class II malocclusion treatment are similar; however, treatment with the Jasper Jumper was shorter than with the Bionator.

Class II malocclusion treatment using Jasper Jumper appliance associated to intermaxillary elastics: a case report.

INTRODUCTION: Skeletal, dental and profile discrepancies can be amended by using functional orthodontic appliances. OBJECTIVE: This study is a report of the treatment of a patient, 11 years and 4 months old, with Class II, division 1, malocclusion, convex profile, protrusion of upper incisors, pronounced overjet and overbite, and mild crowding. METHODS: The patient was treated with a Jasper Jumper associated to fixed appliances for 6 months and Class II intermaxillary elastics (3/16-in) during the last 4 months. After debonding, a Hawley retainer was used during daytime and a modified Bionator for night use during one year. In the lower dental arch a bonded lingual retainer was used. This treatment combination improved the profile, as well as the overjet, overbite and molar relation. RESULTS: There was clockwise mandibular rotation and increase of lower anterior facial height. The lower incisors were protruded and extruded and the lower molars were extruded. The centric occlusal relation was checked and it was coincident to the maximum usual intercuspation. CONCLUSIONS: It was demonstrated that the Jasper Jumper is an efficient alternative to Class II malocclusion treatment, providing improvement in the facial profile, although the changes are more dentoalveolar than skeletal.

Class II subdivision malocclusion types and evaluation of their asymmetries.

INTRODUCTION: The primary objective of this study was to determine, by means of frontal photographic evaluation, the distribution of the 2 main types of Class II subdivision malocclusions. The secondary objective was to compare the dentoskeletal asymmetries in these 2 types with a group of normal-occlusion subjects by using submentovertex and posteroanterior radiographs. METHODS: The experimental group included 44 untreated Class II subdivision malocclusion subjects with a mean age of 15.3 years. The control group included 30 subjects with normal occlusions with a mean age of 22.4 years. All had full complements of permanent teeth up to the first molars and had not received orthodontic treatment. Type 1 Class II subdivision malocclusion is coincidence of the maxillary dental midline with the facial midline and deviation of the mandibular midline. Type 2 has the opposite characteristics. The frontal photographs were evaluated subjectively by 2 examiners. In the submentovertex and posteroanterior radiographs, symmetry was assessed by measuring the relative difference in the spatial positions of dentoskeletal landmarks between the right and left sides. Independent t tests were used to compare the dentoskeletal asymmetries of types 1 and 2 with the normal-occlusion group. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: The results showed that 61.36% had type 1, 18.18% had type 2 Class II subdivision malocclusion, and 20.45% had mixed characteristics. The predominant asymmetric dentoalveolar characteristics of both types of Class II subdivision malocclusions were evident when individually compared with a normal-occlusion control group. There was a tendency for the type 1 subjects to have greater mandibular asymmetry than type 2, as compared with the control group.

Class II subdivision treatment success rate with symmetric and asymmetric extraction protocols.

The purpose of this study was to compare the success rates of Class II subdivision malocclusion patients treated with either symmetric or asymmetric extractions. The sample consisted of 51 patients with Class II subdivision malocclusion. The patients were divided into 2 groups. Group 1 included 28 patients who were treated with 4 premolar extractions. The 23 patients in group 2 were treated with 3 premolar extractions (2 maxillary premolars and 1 mandibular premolar on the Class I side). The initial and final study models were evaluated by means of Grainger's treatment priority index (TPI). Individual evaluations of improvements in maxillary-to-mandibular dental midline deviation, overjet, and overbite were also made. The final mean TPI and the mean improvement in TPI and in the other variables of each group were compared with independent t tests. The results showed a statistically significant difference only for the improvement in maxillary-to-mandibular dental midline deviation of the groups. The 3-premolar-extraction group had a greater improvement of the initial interdental midline deviation. There is a tendency for a slightly better treatment success rate when Class II subdivision patients are treated with asymmetric extraction of 3 premolars, compared with extraction of 4 premolars.