Comparative evaluation of molar distalization therapy using pendulum and distal screw appliances
2
조회
0
다운로드
5
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Objective: To compare dentoalveolar and skeletal changes produced by the pendulum appliance (PA) and the distal screw appliance (DS) in Class II patients. Methods: Forty-three patients (19 men, 24 women) with Class II malocclusion were retrospectively selected for the study. Twenty-four patients (mean age, 12.2 ± 1.5 years) were treated with the PA, and 19 patients (mean age, 11.3 ± 1.9 years) were treated with the DS. The mean distalization time was 7 months for the PA group and 9 months for the DS group. Lateral cephalograms were obtained at T1, before treatment, and at T2, the end of distalization. A Mann-Whitney U test was used for statistical comparisons of the two groups between T1 and T2. Results: PA and DS were equally effective in distalizing maxillary molars (4.7 mm and 4.2 mm, respectively) between T1 and T2; however, the maxillary first molars showed less distal tipping in the DS group than in the PA group (3.2o vs. 9.0o, respectively). Moreover, significant premolar anchorage loss (2.7 mm) and incisor proclination (5.0o) were noted in the PA group, whereas premolar distal movement (1.9 mm) and no significant changes at the incisor (0.1o) were observed in the DS group. No significant sagittal or vertical skeletal changes were detected between the two groups during the distalization phase. Conclusions: PA and DS seem to be equally effective in distalizing maxillary molars; however, greater distal molar tipping and premolar anchorage loss can be expected using PA. [Korean J Orthod 2015;45(4):171-179]
Abstract
Objective: To compare dentoalveolar and skeletal changes produced by the pendulum appliance (PA) and the distal screw appliance (DS) in Class II patients. Methods: Forty-three patients (19 men, 24 women) with Class II malocclusion were retrospectively selected for the study. Twenty-four patients (mean age, 12.2 ± 1.5 years) were treated with the PA, and 19 patients (mean age, 11.3 ± 1.9 years) were treated with the DS. The mean distalization time was 7 months for the PA group and 9 months for the DS group. Lateral cephalograms were obtained at T1, before treatment, and at T2, the end of distalization. A Mann-Whitney U test was used for statistical comparisons of the two groups between T1 and T2. Results: PA and DS were equally effective in distalizing maxillary molars (4.7 mm and 4.2 mm, respectively) between T1 and T2; however, the maxillary first molars showed less distal tipping in the DS group than in the PA group (3.2o vs. 9.0o, respectively). Moreover, significant premolar anchorage loss (2.7 mm) and incisor proclination (5.0o) were noted in the PA group, whereas premolar distal movement (1.9 mm) and no significant changes at the incisor (0.1o) were observed in the DS group. No significant sagittal or vertical skeletal changes were detected between the two groups during the distalization phase. Conclusions: PA and DS seem to be equally effective in distalizing maxillary molars; however, greater distal molar tipping and premolar anchorage loss can be expected using PA. [Korean J Orthod 2015;45(4):171-179]
참고문헌 (30)
- Fontana M, "Non-compliance maxillary molar distalizing appliances: an overview of the last decade", Prog Orthod, 13, pp.173~184 (2012)
- Hilgers JJ, "The pendulum appliance for Class II noncompliance therapy", J Clin Orthod, 26, pp.706~714 (1992)
- Ghosh J, "Evaluation of an intraoral maxillary molar distalization technique", Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 110, pp.639~646 (1996)
- Byloff FK, "Distal molar movement using the pendulum appliance. Part 1: Clinical and radiological evaluation", Angle Orthod, 67, pp.249~260 (1997)
- Byloff FK, "Distal molar movement using the pendulum appliance. Part 2: The effects of maxillary molar root uprighting bends", Angle Orthod, 67, pp.261~270 (1997)
- Chiu PP, "A comparison of two intraoral molar distalization appliances:distal jet versus pendulum", Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 128, pp.353~365 (2005)
- Caprioglio A, "Maxillary molar distalization: Pendulum and Fast-Back, comparison between two approaches for Class II malocclusion", Prog Orthod, 12, pp.8~16 (2011)
- Cheng SJ, "A prospective study of the risk factors associated with failure of mini-implants used for orthodontic anchorage", Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants, 19, pp.100~106 (2004)
- Gracco A, "Quantitative cone-beam computed tomography evaluation of palatal bone thickness for orthodontic miniscrew placement", Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 134, pp.361~369 (2008)
- King KS, "Vertical bone volume in the paramedian palate of adolescents: a computed tomography study", Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 132, pp.783~788 (2007)
- Cozzani M, "Why, when and how distalizing maxillary molars", Ortognatod Ital, 14, pp.21~27 (2007)
- Poggio PM, ""Safe zones": a guide for miniscrew positioning in the maxillary and mandibular arch", Angle Orthod, 76, pp.191~197 (2006)
- Grec RH, "Intraoral distalizer effects with conventional and skeletal anchorage:a meta-analysis", Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 143, pp.602~615 (2013)
- Kircelli BH, "Maxillary molar distalization with a bone-anchored pendulum appliance", Angle Orthod, 76, pp.650~659 (2006)
- Escobar SA, "Distalization of maxillary molars with the bone-supported pendulum: a clinical study", Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 131, pp.545~549 (2007)
- Sar C, "Comparison of two implant-supported molar distalization systems", Angle Orthod, 83, pp.460~467 (2013)
- Kinzinger GS, "Efficiency of a skeletonized distal jet appliance supported by miniscrew anchorage for noncompliance maxillary molar distalization", Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 136, pp.578~586 (2009)
- Cozzani M, "Efficiency of the distal screw in the distal movement of maxillary molars", World J Orthod, 11, pp.341~345 (2010)
- Ludwig B, "The skeletal frog appliance for maxillary molar distalization", J Clin Orthod, 45, pp.77~84 (2011)
- Papadopoulos MA, "Orthodontic treatment of Class II malocclusion with miniscrew implants", Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 134, pp.604~ (2008)
- Wilmes B, "Esthetic Class II treatment with the Beneslider and aligners", J Clin Orthod, 46, pp.390~398 (2012)
- Polat-Ozsoy O, "Pendulum appliances with 2anchorage designs: conventional anchorage vs bone anchorage", Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 133, pp.339~ (2008)
- Cozzani M, "Comparison of maxillary molar distalization with an implant-supported distal jet and a traditional tooth-supported distal jet appliance", Int J Dent, 2014, pp.937059~ (2014)
- Arnett GW, "Facial planning for orthodontists and oral surgeons", Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 126, pp.290~295 (2004)
- Bolla E, "Evaluation of maxillary molar distalization with the distal jet: a comparison with other contemporary methods", Angle Orthod, 72, pp.481~494 (2002)
- Enlow DH, "The morphological and morphogenetic basis for craniofacial form and pattern", Angle Orthod, 41, pp.161~188 (1971)
- Caprioglio A, "Long-term evaluation of the molar movements following Pendulum and fixed appliances", Angle Orthod, 83, pp.447~454 (2013)
- Dahlberg G., "Statistical methods for medical and biological students", pp.122~132 (1940), Allen and Unwin
- Houston WJ, "The analysis of errors in orthodontic measurements", Am J Orthod, 83, pp.382~390 (1983)
- Angelieri F, "Dentoalveolar and skeletal changes associated with the pendulum appliance followed by fixed orthodontic treatment", Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 129, pp.520~527 (2006)