Efficiency of Class II Malocclusion Treatment With Extraction of 2 Maxillary Premolars and the First Class Appliance Anchored in Mini-Implants

被引:0
|
作者
Tonello, Diego Luiz [1 ]
Cavalcanti, Heloisa Nelson [1 ]
Lazaro, Vinicius Ribeiro de Almeida
Bellini-Pereira, Silvio Augusto [1 ]
Castillo, Aron Aliaga-Del [2 ]
Henriques, Jose Fernando Castanha [1 ]
Garib, Daniela [1 ]
Janson, Guilherme [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Sao Paulo, Bauru Dent Sch, Dept Orthodont, Bauru, Brazil
[2] Univ Michigan, Sch Dent, Dept Orthodont & Pediat Dent, Ann Arbor, MI USA
关键词
angle class II; efficiency; malocclusion; orthodontics; OBJECTIVE GRADING SYSTEM; MOLAR DISTALIZATION; PENDULUM APPLIANCE;
D O I
10.1111/ocr.12905
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
Objectives Treatment efficiency is considered an important clinical variable in orthodontic practice; therefore, the aim of this study was to compare the efficiency between different Class II compensatory treatment approaches. The extraction of 2 maxillary premolars was compared to molar distalization with the First Class distaliser indirectly anchored to mini-implants. Materials and Methods A retrospective sample of 31 patients was divided into two groups. Group 1: Class II treatment with two premolar extractions; 18 patients with a mean initial age of 14.3 +/- 1.3 years. Group 2: Distalization with the First Class appliance indirectly anchored to mini-implants; 13 patients with a mean initial age of 13.3 +/- 1.3 years. The Peer Assessment Rating (PAR) and the Objective Grading System (OGS) were used to calculate the percentage of occlusal improvement (PcPAR), treatment time (TT) and treatment efficiency index (TEI). The occlusal indexes, TT and TEI between both groups were compared using t tests (p < 0.05). Results Similar occlusal outcomes were observed between the groups, with no statistically significant differences (F-PAR and OGS). The TT in Group 1 was significantly shorter compared to Group 2. As a result, treatment with extractions was significantly more efficient (TEI: 3.23) than the treatment with maxillary molar distalization anchored indirectly to mini-implants (TEI: 1.95). Conclusions Both treatment protocols showed similar occlusal results; however, Class II correction with two premolar extractions is significantly more efficient than molar distalization with indirect skeletal anchorage.
引用
收藏
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Orthodontic treatment of nongrowing patient with Class II Division 2 malocclusion by Herbst appliance
    Nedeljkovic, Nenad
    Glisic, Branislav
    Markovic, Evgenija
    Scepan, Ivana
    Stamenkovic, Zorana
    VOJNOSANITETSKI PREGLED, 2009, 66 (10) : 840 - 844
  • [42] Orthodontic-surgical treatment for severe skeletal class Ⅱ malocclusion with vertical maxillary excess and four premolars extraction: A case report
    Yi-Wen Zhou
    Yan-Yi Wang
    Zhi-Feng He
    Ming-Xing Lu
    Gui-Feng Li
    Huang Li
    World Journal of Clinical Cases, 2023, (05) : 1106 - 1114
  • [43] Development of a new fixed functional appliance for treatment of skeletal class II malocclusion. First report
    Kinzinger G.
    Ostheimer J.
    Förster F.
    Kwandt P.B.
    Reul H.
    Diedrich P.
    Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics / Fortschritte der Kieferorthopädie, 2002, 63 (5): : 384 - 399
  • [44] Efficiency of Class I and Class II malocclusion treatment with four premolar extractions
    Janson, Guilherme
    Nakamura, Alexandre
    Barros, Sergio Estelita
    Bombonatti, Roberto
    Chiqueto, Kelly
    JOURNAL OF APPLIED ORAL SCIENCE, 2014, 22 (06) : 522 - 527
  • [45] Class II Division 1 malocclusion treatment with extraction of maxillary first molars: Evaluation of treatment and post-treatment changes by the PAR Index
    Booij, Johan W.
    Kuijpers-Jagtman, Anne Marie
    Bronkhorst, Ewald M.
    Livas, Christos
    Ren, Yijin
    Kuijpers, Mette A. R.
    Katsaros, Christos
    ORTHODONTICS & CRANIOFACIAL RESEARCH, 2021, 24 (01) : 102 - 110
  • [46] Class II division 1 malocclusion treatment with extraction of maxillary first permanent molars: cephalometric evaluation of treatment and post-treatment changes
    Booij, Johan Willem
    Kuijpers-Jagtman, Anne Marie
    Bronkhorst, Ewald M.
    Rangel, Frits A.
    Livas, Christos
    Ren, Yijin
    Katsaros, Christos
    Ongkosuwito, Edwin M.
    AUSTRALASIAN ORTHODONTIC JOURNAL, 2021, 37 (02): : 294 - 310
  • [47] Treatment of Class II malocclusion with tooth movement through the maxillary sinus
    Cha, Sa
    Zhang, Chengxiaoxue
    Zhao, Qing
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ORTHODONTICS AND DENTOFACIAL ORTHOPEDICS, 2020, 157 (01) : 105 - 116
  • [48] Dentoskeletal and Soft Tissue Effects of Mini-implants in Class II division 1 Patients
    Ulpadhyay, Madhur
    Yadav, Sumit
    Nagaraj, K.
    Nanda, Ravindra
    ANGLE ORTHODONTIST, 2009, 79 (02) : 240 - 247
  • [49] Nonextraction treatment of a Class II malocclusion and impacted maxillary central incisor
    Batterson, KD
    Curtis, T
    Parks, C
    Curtis, E
    Carlson, C
    Southard, TE
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ORTHODONTICS AND DENTOFACIAL ORTHOPEDICS, 2004, 125 (01) : 107 - 114