Evaluation of changes in the maxillary sinus of orthodontic patients with maxillary molar distalization using cone-beam computed tomography.

INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to evaluate the possible effects of maxillary molar distalization on maxillary sinus mucosa thickness and sinus volume in 3-dimensions. METHODS: The study was conducted with 46 patients: 73.9% (n = 34) females and 26.1% (n = 12) males. The patients had a mean age of 27.89 ± 6.62 years, ranging from 18 to 45 years. The study included patients who were admitted to the Faculty of Dentistry at Van Yüzüncü Yil University between 2010 and 2021 and underwent cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) before and after orthodontic treatment for various reasons. The CBCT scans of patients were divided into 2 groups: the first group underwent orthodontic treatment and maxillary molar distalization with Class II elastic, whereas the second group consisted of patients who did not get orthodontic treatment (control). In CBCTs, sinus mucosa thickness was measured on the anterior, posterior, medial, lateral, superior, and inferior walls of the maxillary right and left sinuses. Three-dimensional volume calculations were made using CBCT images taken before and after the treatment of both orthodontic treatment patients and control patients. Statistical significance was set at P <0.05. RESULTS: The orthodontic treatment group had a mean distalization of 2.86 ± 0.27 mm. The mean distalization time was 8.01 ± 0.64 months. When the differences between the pretreatment and posttreatment CBCT scans were examined in terms of sinus mucosa thickness in the anterior, posterior, medial, lateral, and superior walls of the right and left sinuses, there was no statistically significant difference between treatment and control groups (P >0.05). The change in sinus mucosa thickness in the right and left sinus inferior wall from T1 to T2 was significantly higher in the control group than treatment group (P <0.05). In addition, the increase in maxillary sinus volume was statistically significantly higher in the treatment group than in the control group (P <0.05). CONCLUSIONS: We observed that maxillary molar distalization caused an increase in maxillary sinus volume. The change in sinus mucosa thickness in the right and left sinus inferior wall was lower in the maxillary molar distalization group.

Does Appliance Design Affect Treatment Outcomes of Class II Division 1 Malocclusion? A Two-Center Retrospective Study.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this retrospective study was to compare the pre- and post-treatment values of patients treated with monoblock and twin-block appliances with the values of the skeletal Class I individuals. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The initial lateral cephalometric radiographs of the pubertal untreated skeletal class I patients and cephalometric radiographs of 60 (30 monoblock, 30 twin-block) patients before and after the functional treatment were included in the study. Skeletal, dental, and soft tissue measurements were performed by a single researcher using Dolphin Imaging software version 11.95 (Dolphin Imaging, Chatsworth, CA, USA). Paired t-test was used for statistical evaluation and P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: In both monoblock and twin-block groups, there was a statistically significant increase in the measurements of the lower jaw and the vertical direction values (sella nasion B point (SNB), pogonion nasion perpendicular, Y-axis, sella nasion-gonion gnathion, palatal-mandibular angle, anterior facial height, mandibular length P < 0.05); however, in the Twin-block group, the lower jaw was found to be displaced more forward (change for twin-block; SNB = 2.35, Wits appraisal = -4.77). The most measurements of the twin-block treated group were similar to the control group. CONCLUSIONS: Both functional appliances have been identified to be useful in achieving treatment targets; however, with twin-block, results closer to ideal values are obtained.

Identification of Maxillofacial Problems in Extraoral Photographs by Panel Members: A Pilot Study.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this pilot study was to evaluate the effectiveness of the profile and frontal photographs in determining sagittal maxillofacial problems by the panel members created from different professional groups. METHODS: Frontal and profile photographs of four individuals with skeletal Class I, Class II Division 1, Class II Division 2, and Class III malocclusion were assessed by panel members. A total of 42 panel members from 7 different professions participated in the study. Panel members were asked to choose one of the frontal or profile photographs to be used in determining the maxillofacial problem. Mann-Whitney U test, Kruskal-Wallis test, and Fisher's exact test were applied to evaluate the difference between the panelists. RESULTS: Of the 42 panel members, 16% selected frontal photographs, and 84% selected profile photographs. There were no statistically significant differences between seven panels with regard to photography selection (p>0.05). When all panel members were compared with regard to gender, 17.9% of the frontal photographs and 82.1% of the profile photographs were selected by females, whereas 15.4% of the frontal photographs and 84.6% of the profile photographs were chosen by males. There was no statistically significant difference between males and females (p>0.05). CONCLUSION: It was found that the profile photograph was more preferred and informative in determining the sagittal maxillofacial problem.