Three-dimensional evaluation of the effects of Bionator and Forsus appliances on oropharyngeal airway volume in patients with mandibular retrognathia.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether there is a difference between the effects of Bionator and Forsus appliances on airway volume. METHODS: Forty patients with mandibular retrognathia were divided into two groups. The Bionator appliance was applied to Group 1, while the Forsus FRD EZ2 appliance was applied to Group 2. Three-dimensional images were captured before and after functional appliance use in both groups. Dolphin 3D software was used for airway measurements. RESULTS: No statistically significant difference was found between the groups in terms of volumetric and area measurements. There was a statistically significant difference between the minimum axial T and O-N border T measurements of the groups. CONCLUSION: The use of functional appliances may contribute to an increase in oropharyngeal airway dimensions, but there was no difference between the Bionator and Forsus groups in terms of volumetric measurements.

Anamnesis and examination forms used in orthodontic clinics: A pilot study.

INTRODUCTION: Examination is a basic step in the treatment of patients. This study aimed to assess the examination forms of different private and university orthodontic clinics. METHODS: Examination forms were collected from 21 university and 21 private orthodontic clinics. The 80 questions examined in the study were evaluated under 3 subheadings (demographic questions, systemic disease questions, and dental questions). RESULTS: In the evaluation among the groups, the number of questions asked in universities was statistically significantly higher in terms of the total number of questions asked. The number of university questions was statistically significantly higher in the evaluation among the groups of dental questions (P <0.05). In all of the subheadings, there were statistically significant differences between groups and parents' occupation, e-mail, reference, pricing, and personal data protection law questions (P <0.05); breathing pattern question (P <0.05); tongue function, frenulum assessment, transverse problem, jaw deviation, midline, dentition, canine relationship, overjet, overbite, number of teeth, impacted tooth, shape anomaly, dental trauma, profile, and incisal exposure questions (P <0.05). CONCLUSIONS: There is no consensus on the examination forms used in orthodontics clinics. Although both universities and private clinics aim to treat orthodontic patients, the questions they asked were different in accordance with their dynamics.

Do different orthodontic pliers used in bracket debonding have different effects on pain and sensitivity? A prospective split-mouth study.

OBJECTIVES: The assessment of whether different orthodontic pliers used in bracket debonding have different effects on pain and sensitivity experience. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-three patients (17 females, 16 males) with metal brackets were included in the study. Compressed air and freshly melted ice water were applied to each tooth (6-6) in upper and lower arch before bracket debonding (T0), just after debonding (T1), and 1 week after debonding (T2). Bracket remover plier (BRP) and Weingart plier (WP) were used to debond brackets. A numeric rating scale (NRS) was used to assess sensitivity for each tooth at T0, T1, and T2. Tooth pain was assessed for each tooth using NRS during bracket debonding. RESULTS: Statistically higher pain scores were found in teeth U4 (upper first premolar) (p = 0.017) and L6 (lower first molar) (p = 0.026) in Weingart plier group. No statistically significant difference was found during debonding in the other teeth between groups. Statistically high sensitivity score was found at T1 time point in tooth U3 (upper canine) by applying air stimulus in Weingart plier group (p = 0.024). There was no statistically significant difference between the sensitivity scores measured at T2 time point by applying air and cold stimuli between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Although the debonding pain scores were statistically significant in two teeth and the sensitivity score in one tooth, there was no clinical significance between the two pliers in terms of pain and sensitivity. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Both debonding pliers gave clinically similar results in terms of pain and sensitivity.

Did the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic affect orthodontic treatment outcomes? A clinical evaluation using the objective grading system and Peer Assessment Rating index.

INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to compare the treatment outcome of patients whose orthodontic treatment was completed before or during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. METHODS: Pretreatment and posttreatment models of 100 patients treated with fixed orthodontic appliances were evaluated using the peer assessment rating (PAR) index. Posttreatment models and panoramic radiographs were measured and scored with the objective grading system (OGS). All patients had their treatment plans before the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, but the orthodontic treatment finishing date was before (prepandemic: group 1, n = 50) or during (pandemic: group 2, n = 50) the pandemic. Intergroup comparisons were tested with an independent samples t test or Mann-Whitney U test. Chi-square test statistics and Fisher exact test were used to compare categorical variables. RESULTS: Significant higher posttreatment weighted maxillary alignment score was found in group 2. However, no significant difference was found between the groups concerning the mean total weighted PAR reduction (29.8 ± 9.9 vs 25.6 ± 8.7) and posttreatment total weighted PAR scores (1 vs 2). The PAR index score improvement (%) was similar between the groups (93.7 ± 7.1 vs 89.9 ± 13.0). No statistically significant difference was found between the groups for the total OGS score (32 vs 33). A lower score for marginal ridge height (4 vs 3) and a higher score for buccolingual inclination (7 vs 11), and a lower score for occlusal relationship (3 vs 1) were found in group 2. Canceled appointments (1.1 ± 0.7 vs 4.8 ± 1.6) and the number of missed appointments (0.6 ± 0.5 vs 1.1 ± 0.8) were statistically higher in group 2, whereas the total number of appointments (27.3 ± 8.8 vs 21.8 ± 5.4) were statistically less. The treatment duration was comparable in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Reduced and irregular appointments during the pandemic resulted in significantly higher posttreatment weighted maxillary alignment and worsening of the buccolingual inclination. However, the PAR score improvement, total OGS score, and treatment duration were not affected.

Web-based Fully Automated Cephalometric Analysis: Comparisons between App-aided, Computerized, and Manual Tracings.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the accuracy of cephalometric analyses made with fully automated tracings, computerized tracing, and app-aided tracings with equivalent hand-traced measurements, and to evaluate the tracing time for each cephalometric analysis method. METHODS: Pre-treatment lateral cephalometric radiographs of 40 patients were randomly selected. Eight angular and 4 linear parameters were measured by 1 operator using 3 methods: computerized tracing with software Dolphin Imaging 13.01(Dolphin Imaging and Management Solutions, Chatsworth, Calif, USA), app-aided tracing using the CephNinja 3.51 app (Cyncronus LLC, WA, USA), and web-based fully automated tracing with CephX (ORCA Dental AI, Las Vegas, NV). Correction of CephX landmarks was also made. Manual tracings were performed by 3 operators. Remeasurement of 15 radiographs was carried out to determine the intra-examiner and inter-examiner (manual tracings) correlation coefficient (ICC). Inter-group comparisons were made with one-way analysis of variance. The Tukey test was used for post hoc testing. RESULTS: Overall, greater variability was found with CephX compared with the other methods. Differences in GoGn-SN (°), I-NA (°), I-NB (°), I-NA (mm), and I-NB (mm) were statistically (p<0.05) and clinically significant using CephX, whereas CephNinja and Dolphin were comparable to manual tracings. Correction of CephX landmarks gave similar results to CephNinja and Dolphin. All the ICCs exceeded 0.85, except for I-NA (°), I-NB (°), and I-NB (mm), which were traced with CephX. The shortest analyzing time was obtained with CephX. CONCLUSION: Fully automatic analysis with CephX needs to be more reliable. However, CephX analysis with manual correction is promising for use in clinical practice because it is comparable to CephNinja and Dolphin, and the analyzing time is significantly shorter.

A comparison of the accuracy of Willems' and Cameriere's methods based on panoramic radiography.

Tooth development evaluation is majorly the current approach to identify age and maturity. Dental age (DA) is therefore considerably emphasized in forensic and pediatric dentistry. The aim of this study was to assess the applicability of Willems and Cameriere methods for Turkish children. Panoramic images of 636 Turkish healthy children (319 male; 317 female) aged between 6 and 15 years were assessed. DA of the subjects was determined by using Willems and Cameriere methods. The seven right and left permanent lower teeth were valued using these two methods. The mean chronological age (CA) of the subjects was 11.53±2.25 (min:6, max:14.99) years (boys: 11.29±2.34 years, girls: 11.77±2.15 years). Willems method overestimated the CA (p≤0.001), in contrast, Cameriere method underestimated the CA (p≤0.001) for both sexes. In different age groups the mean difference between the CA and DA calculated by Cameriere method (CADA) ranged from 0.86 to -0.41 years for boys and from 1.00 to -0.21 years for girls, while the mean difference between the CA and DA calculated by Willems method ranged from -0.26 to -0.71 years for boys and from 0.19 to -0.76 years for girls. Cameriere method provided a better percentage of accuracy (84.6% and 77.3% for males and females, respectively) in the absolute difference values within 1 year compared to Willems method. Cameriere method performed slightly better but, both methods may be used for DA estimation in the Turkish population.