Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Comparison between direct vs indirect anchorage in two miniscrew-supported distalizing devices.
Cozzani, Mauro; Fontana, Mattia; Maino, Giuliano; Maino, Giovanna; Palpacelli, Lucia; Caprioglio, Alberto.
Afiliação
  • Cozzani M; a Professor of Orthodontics, School of Dental Medicine, University of Cagliari, La Spezia, Italy.
  • Fontana M; b Research Fellow in Orthodontics, University of Insubria, Varese, Italy.
  • Maino G; c Visiting Professor, Post-Graduate Program in Orthodontics, University of Insubria, Varese, Italy.
  • Maino G; d Graduate in Orthodontics, Private Practice, Basso del Grappa, Italy.
  • Palpacelli L; e Graduate in Orthodontics, Private Practice, Macerata, Italy.
  • Caprioglio A; f Chairman, Post-Graduate Program in Orthodontics, School of Dental Medicine, Department of Surgical and Morphological Science, University of Insubria, Varese, Italy.
Angle Orthod ; 86(3): 399-406, 2016 May.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26222412
ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE:

To compare two distalizing devices supported by palatal miniscrews, the MGBM System (MGBM) and the Distal Screw appliance (DS), in dental Class II patients. MATERIALS AND

METHODS:

Pretreatment (T1) and postdistalization (T2) lateral cephalograms of 53 Class II malocclusion subjects were examined. MGBM consisted of 29 patients (16 males, 13 females) with a mean pretreatment age of 12.3 ± 1.5 years; DS consisted of 24 patients (11 males, 13 females) with a mean pretreatment age of 11.3 ± 1.2 years. The mean distalization time was 6 ± 2 months for MGBM and 9 ± 2 months for DS. Initial and final measurements and treatment changes were compared by means of a Student's t-test.

RESULTS:

Maxillary superimpositions showed that the maxillary first molar distalized an average of 5.5 mm in the MGBM and 3.2 mm in the DS between T1 and T2; distal molar tipping was greater in the MGBM (10.3°) than in the DS (3.0°). First premolar showed a mean mesial movement of 1.4 mm, with a mesial tipping of 4.4° in the MGBM; on the contrary, first premolar showed a distal movement of 2.2 mm, with a distal tipping of 6.2°, in the DS.

CONCLUSIONS:

The MGBM system resulted in greater distal molar movement and less treatment time, resulting in more efficient movement than was associated with the DS; DS showed less molar tipping during distalization.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Técnicas de Movimentação Dentária / Desenho de Aparelho Ortodôntico / Má Oclusão Classe II de Angle Limite: Adolescent / Child / Female / Humans / Male Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2016 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Técnicas de Movimentação Dentária / Desenho de Aparelho Ortodôntico / Má Oclusão Classe II de Angle Limite: Adolescent / Child / Female / Humans / Male Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2016 Tipo de documento: Article