Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Korean J Orthod ; 47(6): 375-383, 2017 Nov.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29090125

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the dental and skeletal effects of the modified C-palatal plate (MCPP) for total arch distalization in adult patients with Class II malocclusion and compare the findings with those of cervical pull headgear. METHODS: The study sample consisted of the lateral cephalograms of 44 adult patients with Class II Division 1 malocclusion, including 22 who received treatment with MCPP (age, 24.7 ± 7.7 years) and 22 who received treatment with cervical pull headgear (age, 23.0 ± 7.7 years). Pre- (T1) and post-treatment (T2) cephalograms were analyzed for 24 linear and angular measurements. Multivariate analysis of variance was performed to evaluate the changes after treatment in each group and differences in treatment effects between the two groups. RESULTS: The mean amount of distalization at the crown and root levels of the maxillary first molar and the amount of distal tipping was 4.2 mm, 3.5 mm, and 3.9° in the MCPP group, and 2.3 mm, 0.6 mm, and 8.6° in the headgear group, respectively. In addition, intrusion by 2.5 mm was observed in the MCPP group. In both groups, the distal movement of the upper lip and the increase in the nasolabial angle were statistically significant (p < 0.001). However, none of the skeletal and soft tissue variables exhibited significant differences between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study suggest that MCPP is an effective treatment modality for total arch distalization in adults.

2.
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop ; 148(2): 310-20, 2015 Aug.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26232840

RESUMO

Correction of a severe protrusive soft tissue profile without orthognathic surgery can be challenging. This case report describes the treatment of a young woman with a severe bimaxillary protrusion. Orthodontic treatment included extraction of her 4 first premolars and total arch distalization of both arches using a palatal plate appliance. The total treatment time was 24 months. Her occlusion and facial appearance were significantly improved.


Assuntos
Dente Pré-Molar/cirurgia , Má Oclusão/terapia , Procedimentos de Ancoragem Ortodôntica/instrumentação , Desenho de Aparelho Ortodôntico , Extração Dentária/métodos , Técnicas de Movimentação Dentária/instrumentação , Parafusos Ósseos , Cefalometria/métodos , Arco Dental/patologia , Elastômeros/química , Feminino , Seguimentos , Humanos , Incisivo/patologia , Má Oclusão Classe I de Angle/terapia , Miniaturização , Dente Molar/patologia , Contenções Ortodônticas , Sobremordida/terapia , Resultado do Tratamento , Adulto Jovem
3.
Angle Orthod ; 85(4): 657-64, 2015 Jul.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25191840

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate and compare skeletal effects and the amount of molar distalization in maxilla using modified palatal anchorage plate (MPAP) vs headgear appliances in adolescent patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Pre- and posttreatment lateral cephalograms of 45 Class II malocclusion patients were analyzed; 24 were treated with MPAP appliances (age, 12.4 years) and 21 with headgear (age, 12.1 years). Fixed orthodontic treatment started with the distalization process in both groups. Thirty-two variables were measured and compared between both groups using multivariate analysis of covariates. RESULTS: There was no significant main effect of the appliance type on the treatment results (P  =  .063). Also, there was no significant main effect of the appliance type on both pre- and posttreatment comparisons (P  =  .0198 and .135, respectively). The MPAP and headgear groups showed significant distalization of maxillary first molars (3.06 ± 0.54 mm and 1.8 ± 0.58 mm, respectively; P < .001). Sagittal skeletal maxillomandibular differences were improved after treatment (P < .001), with no significant differences between the two groups. No significant difference in treatment duration was found between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: The MPAP showed a significant skeletal effect on the maxilla. Both MPAP and headgear resulted in distalization of maxillary first molars. Therefore, it is recommended that clinicians consider the application of MPAP, especially in noncompliant Class II patients.


Assuntos
Incisivo/patologia , Mandíbula/patologia , Maxila/patologia , Dente Molar/patologia , Procedimentos de Ancoragem Ortodôntica/instrumentação , Desenho de Aparelho Ortodôntico , Técnicas de Movimentação Dentária/instrumentação , Adolescente , Pontos de Referência Anatômicos/patologia , Cefalometria/métodos , Criança , Queixo/patologia , Aparelhos de Tração Extrabucal , Feminino , Seguimentos , Humanos , Masculino , Má Oclusão Classe II de Angle/terapia , Osso Nasal/patologia , Estudos Retrospectivos
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...