Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 6 de 6
Filter
1.
Dental Press J Orthod ; 26(4): e2119360, 2021.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34524380

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Orthodontists have been using clear aligners to treat malocclusions, and one potential effect of treatment with orthodontic aligners is the intrusion and/or resists extrusion of the posterior teeth. This "bite-block effect" is primarily anecdotal due to the frequent occurrence of posterior open bites in patients after clear aligner therapy. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare changes promoted by clear aligners and traditional fixed appliances in cephalometric measurements of the vertical dimension and molar position in adult patients with Class I malocclusion treated with non-extraction. METHODS: Pre- and post-treatment lateral cephalometric radiographs of adult patients treated with either clear aligners (n=44) or traditional fixed appliances (n=22) were selected for retrospective analysis. Eight interval measurements and one nominal measurement were evaluated: anterior overbite (OB), mandibular plane angle related to cranial base (SN_MP) and related to Frankfort (FMA), lower molar height (L6H) and upper molar height (U6H), palatal plane to mandibular plane angle (PP_MP), lower facial height (LFH), total facial height (TFH), and posterior open bite (Posterior_OB). A single evaluator traced all cephalographs, and changes in select measures of the vertical dimension were compared within and between groups. RESULTS: OB decreased (1.15 mm) and L6H increased (0.63 mm) in the traditional fixed appliance group. Mandibular plane angles (related to cranial base and to Frankfort) increased (0.43° and 0.53°, respectively) in the clear aligner group, but just FMA showed significant difference between groups (difference of 0.53°). LFH and TFH increased (ranging from 0.52 mm to 0.80 mm) in both groups, with no differences between treatment modality. Presence of visible posterior open bite significantly increased over the course of treatment. OB, FMA and L6H exhibited an interaction between treatment stage (pre- and post-treatment) and modality (clear aligner therapy and traditional fixed appliances), but no interaction among these three variables was found. CONCLUSIONS: The evidence does not support the theory that clear aligner therapy produces better vertical dimension control than traditional fixed appliances. Traditional fixed appliance therapy slightly extruded the lower molar, and clear aligner therapy produced a slightly mandibular backward rotation.


Subject(s)
Malocclusion, Angle Class II , Orthodontic Appliances, Removable , Adult , Cephalometry , Humans , Mandible , Molar/diagnostic imaging , Orthodontic Appliances, Fixed , Retrospective Studies , Vertical Dimension
2.
Dental press j. orthod. (Impr.) ; 26(4): e2119360, 2021. tab, graf
Article in English | LILACS, BBO - Dentistry | ID: biblio-1339804

ABSTRACT

ABSTRACT Introduction: Orthodontists have been using clear aligners to treat malocclusions, and one potential effect of treatment with orthodontic aligners is the intrusion and/or resists extrusion of the posterior teeth. This "bite-block effect" is primarily anecdotal due to the frequent occurrence of posterior open bites in patients after clear aligner therapy. Objective: The purpose of this study was to compare changes promoted by clear aligners and traditional fixed appliances in cephalometric measurements of the vertical dimension and molar position in adult patients with Class I malocclusion treated with non-extraction. Methods: Pre- and post-treatment lateral cephalometric radiographs of adult patients treated with either clear aligners (n=44) or traditional fixed appliances (n=22) were selected for retrospective analysis. Eight interval measurements and one nominal measurement were evaluated: anterior overbite (OB), mandibular plane angle related to cranial base (SN_MP) and related to Frankfort (FMA), lower molar height (L6H) and upper molar height (U6H), palatal plane to mandibular plane angle (PP_MP), lower facial height (LFH), total facial height (TFH), and posterior open bite (Posterior_OB). A single evaluator traced all cephalographs, and changes in select measures of the vertical dimension were compared within and between groups. Results: OB decreased (1.15 mm) and L6H increased (0.63 mm) in the traditional fixed appliance group. Mandibular plane angles (related to cranial base and to Frankfort) increased (0.43° and 0.53°, respectively) in the clear aligner group, but just FMA showed significant difference between groups (difference of 0.53°). LFH and TFH increased (ranging from 0.52 mm to 0.80 mm) in both groups, with no differences between treatment modality. Presence of visible posterior open bite significantly increased over the course of treatment. OB, FMA and L6H exhibited an interaction between treatment stage (pre- and post-treatment) and modality (clear aligner therapy and traditional fixed appliances), but no interaction among these three variables was found. Conclusions: The evidence does not support the theory that clear aligner therapy produces better vertical dimension control than traditional fixed appliances. Traditional fixed appliance therapy slightly extruded the lower molar, and clear aligner therapy produced a slightly mandibular backward rotation.


RESUMO Introdução: Ortodontistas têm usado os alinhadores transparentes para tratar más oclusões, e um potencial efeito desse tratamento é a intrusão e/ou resistência à extrusão dos dentes posteriores. Esse efeito de "bloco de mordida" é principalmente empírico, devido à ocorrência frequente de mordidas abertas posteriores em pacientes após a terapia com alinhadores transparentes. Objetivo: O objetivo do presente estudo foi comparar as mudanças promovidas pelos alinhadores transparentes e aparelho fixo convencional nas medidas cefalométricas de dimensão vertical e posição do molar em pacientes adultos com má oclusão de Classe I tratados sem exodontias. Métodos: Radiografias cefalométricas laterais pré- e pós-tratamento de pacientes adultos tratados com alinhadores transparentes (n=44) ou com aparelho fixo tradicional (n=22) foram selecionadas para uma análise retrospectiva. Oito medidas de intervalo e uma medida nominal foram avaliadas: trespasse vertical anterior (OB), ângulo do plano mandibular em relação à base do crânio (SN_MP) e em relação ao Plano de Frankfurt (FMA), altura do molar inferior (L6H) e altura do molar superior (U6H), ângulo do plano palatal ao plano mandibular (PP_MP), altura facial inferior (LFH), altura facial total (TFH) e mordida aberta posterior (Posterior_OB). Um único avaliador fez todos os traçados cefalométricos, e as mudanças nas medidas da dimensão vertical foram comparadas intra e intergrupos. Resultados: OB reduziu (1,15 mm) e L6H aumentou (0,63 mm) no grupo de aparelho fixo tradicional. Os ângulos do plano mandibular (em relação à base do crânio e ao plano de Frankfurt) aumentaram (0,43° e 0,53°, respectivamente). No grupo dos alinhadores invisíveis, apenas o FMA apresentou diferença significativa entre os grupos (diferença de 0,53º). LFH e TFH aumentaram (variando de 0,52 mm a 0,80 mm) em ambos os grupos, sem diferenças entre as modalidades de tratamento. A presença de uma mordida aberta posterior visível aumentou significativamente durante o curso do tratamento. OB, FMA e L6H exibiram interação entre o estágio do tratamento (pré- e pós-tratamento) e a modalidade (terapia com alinhadores invisíveis ou aparelho fixo tradicional), porém não foi encontrada interação entre essas três variáveis. Conclusões: A evidência não suporta a teoria de que a terapia com alinhadores invisíveis produz melhor controle da dimensão vertical do que o aparelho fixo. O tratamento com aparelhagem fixa extruiu ligeiramente o molar inferior, e o tratamento com alinhadores invisíveis produziu uma ligeira rotação posterior da mandíbula.


Subject(s)
Orthodontic Appliances, Removable , Malocclusion, Angle Class II , Vertical Dimension , Cephalometry , Retrospective Studies , Orthodontic Appliances, Fixed , Mandible , Molar/diagnostic imaging
3.
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop ; 144(6): 916-22, 2013 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24286915

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Impression-free techniques might eliminate the potential shortcomings of digital dental models. Chairside scanners offer the advantage of obtaining digital dental models directly from the patient without the need for dental impressions. The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of 3-dimensional digital models acquired from a chairside intraoral scanner compared with both manual and cone-beam computed tomography measurements of the same dental anatomy. METHODS: The study sample comprised 60 dry skulls. Each skull had the maxillary and mandibular arches scanned with a Cadent iTero scanner (Align Technology, San Jose, Calif) and had a cone-beam computed tomography scan taken with a CS 9300 unit (Carestream Health, Atlanta, Ga). Linear measurements in all 3 dimensions of the space in each dental arch together with tooth-size arch-length analysis for both the maxillary and mandibular arches were carried out manually on the dry skulls with calipers and digitally on the scanned 3-dimensional models and cone-beam computed tomography images. Intraclass correlation (ICC) analysis was performed for all variables tested in the study groups, with the manual measurements on the dry skulls as the gold standard. The Bland-Altman analysis was also applied to the data to graphically display the agreement of the diagnostic measurements obtained from these methods. RESULTS: Measurements from the iTero models demonstrated near-perfect agreement (ICC, 0.91-0.99) with the caliper measurements. Cone-beam computed tomography measurements had moderate to high levels of agreement (ICC, 0.65-0.99) compared with the caliper measurements. CONCLUSIONS: Direct digital acquisition of the dental arches with a chairside scanner provided almost 1-to-1 diagnostic information of the investigated anatomy and was superior to the cone-beam computed tomography measurements.


Subject(s)
Cephalometry/instrumentation , Cone-Beam Computed Tomography , Dental Arch/anatomy & histology , Image Processing, Computer-Assisted/methods , Imaging, Three-Dimensional , Lasers , Models, Dental , Dental Arch/diagnostic imaging , Humans , Mandible/anatomy & histology , Mandible/diagnostic imaging , Maxilla/anatomy & histology , Maxilla/diagnostic imaging , Orthodontics/instrumentation , Reproducibility of Results , Skull/anatomy & histology
4.
Clin Cosmet Investig Dent ; 3: 39-44, 2011.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23674913

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to compare the shear bond strengths of two color-change adhesives with a commonly used conventional light-cure adhesive while using a self-etching primer, and to compare any changes in shear bond strengths over time. METHODS: One hundred and eighty extracted bovine incisors were randomly divided into nine groups of 20 teeth each. The teeth were prepared with a self-etching primer (Transbond™ Plus) Metal lower incisor brackets were bonded directly to each tooth with two different color-change adhesives (TransbondPlus and Grengloo™) and a control (Transbond XT). The teeth were debonded at three different time points (15 minutes, 24 hours, 1 week) using an Instron at 1.0 mm/min. The teeth that were to be debonded at 24 hours and 1 week were stored in distilled water at 37°C to simulate the oral environment. The data were analyzed by two-way analysis of variance and with Fisher's protected least-significant difference multiple comparisons test at the P < 0.05 level of significance. Adhesive remnant index (ARI) scores were calculated for each debonded tooth. RESULTS: Transbond Plus at 1 week had the highest mean shear bond strength (14.7 mPa). Grengloo tested at 24 hours had the lowest mean shear bond strength (11.3 mPa). The mean shear bond strengths for the remaining seven groups had a range of 12-14.5 mPa. Grengloo had >80% samples presenting with an ARI score of 1 at all times. Interestingly, both Transbond groups had ARI scores of 3 in more than 50% of their samples. CONCLUSION: Time had no significant effect on the mean shear bond strength of Transbond XT, Grengloo, or Transbond Plus adhesive.

5.
Tex Dent J ; 128(12): 1261-7, 2011 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22375444

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The objectives of this study were to evaluate the debonding strength and mode of failure of a selenium containing adhesive compared to an established orthodontic adhesive. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One hundred sixty bovine mandibular incisors were allocated to eight groups: steel and clear brackets were bonded with either selenium containing adhesive (Group 1: SeLect Defense) or a conventional light-cured adhesive (Group 2:Transbond XT) to measure debond strength and the adhesive remnant index was used to assess the location of bond failure. Data was evaluated using a three-way analysis of variance and Fisher's PLSD multiple comparisons test for mean debond strengths. RESULTS: Group 2 debond strengths were greater than that of Group 1 with the steel and clear brackets. Group 1 debond strengths were greater with clear than with steel brackets at both time points. Both adhesives demonstrated increased debond strengths from zero to 24 hours and the clear brackets exhibited a greater ARI than steel after debonding. Comparisons of debond strength means among adhesives, brackets, and times were all statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS/DISCUSSION: All debond strengths were within a clinically acceptable range according to previous literature. SeLect Defense may be desirable due to its potential for preventing white spot lesions despite the reduced strength compared to Transbond XT.


Subject(s)
Dental Bonding , Dental Cements/chemistry , Light-Curing of Dental Adhesives , Orthodontic Brackets , Selenium/chemistry , Adhesiveness , Aluminum Oxide/chemistry , Animals , Cattle , Dental Alloys/chemistry , Dental Debonding , Dental Enamel/anatomy & histology , Dental Stress Analysis/instrumentation , Random Allocation , Resin Cements/chemistry , Shear Strength , Stainless Steel/chemistry , Stress, Mechanical , Surface Properties , Time Factors
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...