Maldonado MJA, Lombard RL, Gutiérrez CC, Canseco JJF, Cuairán RV

Idioma: Español
Referencias bibliográficas: 31
Paginas: 27-32
Archivo PDF: 467.06 Kb.

RESUMEN

La búsqueda de la verdadera posición mandibular con respecto a la cavidad glenoidea y la relación de los otros componentes que constituyen la articulación temporomandibular conocida como relación céntrica (RC) son esenciales para el diagnóstico, tratamiento y estabilidad del mismo. El propósito del estudio fue evaluar dos técnicas para el registro de RC (técnica céntrica de poder y técnica del arco gótico) con objeto de determinar el método más eficaz para brindar mayor veracidad en el registro, dado que, en nuestra institución, se han experimentado algunas inconsistencias durante la obtención de registros en pacientes con malformaciones o discrepancias esqueléticas considerables. Se evaluaron quince pacientes sistémicamente sanos, clase ósea II, de entre 13 y 17 años de edad, ocho del sexo femenino (53.4%) y siete del sexo masculino (46.6%). Se realizaron treinta montajes en un articulador semiajustable utilizando ambas técnicas, se monitorearon los cambios a nivel condilar utilizando el indicador de posición axial condilar (IPAC). Los resultados mostraron que no hubo diferencias significativas; sin embargo, los cambios sagitales, verticales y transversales fueron mayores con la técnica del arco gótico.

REFERENCIAS (EN ESTE ARTÍCULO)

1. Klar NA, Kulsbersh R, Freeland T, Kaczynski R. Maximum intercuspation - centric relation disharmony in 200 consecutively finished cases in a gnathologically oriented practice. USA Semin Orthod. 2003; 9: 109-116.

2. Schmitt, Freeland T, Bever K, Pink FE. Reproducibility of the roth power centric in determining centric relation. USA Semin Orthod. 2003; 9: 102-108.

3. Christensen GJ. Is occlusion becoming more confusing? A plea for simplicity. JADA. 2004; 135: 767-770.

4. Rinchuse DJ, Kandasamy S. Centric relation a historical and contemporary orthodontic perspective. JADA. 2006; 137: 494-501.

5. The glossary of prosthodontic terms. J Prosthet Dent. 2005; 94 (1): 10-92.

6. Swenson MG. Complete dentures. Ed. 6. St. Louis, 1970 The C.V. Mosby Co.

7. Shanahan TE. Physiologic jaw relation and occlusion of complete dentures. J Prosthet Dent. 1955; 5: 319-324.

8. McCollum BB. Function--factors that make mouth and teeth a vital organ. Am Dent Assoc. 1927; 14: 1261-1271, CB Mosby, 1989

9. Dawson PE. Evaluation, diagnosis, and treatment of occlusal problems. St Louis, MO.

10. Granger ER. Centric relation. J Prosthet Dent. 1952; 2: 160-171.

11. Lucia VO. A technique for recording centric relation. J Prosthet Dent. 1964; 14: 492-505.

12. Ludeen HC. Centric relation records: The effect of muscle action. J Prosthet Dent. 1974; 31: 244-253.

13. Wood DP, Floreani KJ, Galil KA, Teteruck WR. The effect of incisal bite force on condylar seating. Angle Orthod. 1994; 64: 321-330.

14. Williamson E. Occlusal concepts in orthodontic diagnosis and treatment. In: Johnson LE (ed). New vistas in orthodontics. Philadelphia, PA, 1985; 192-147.

15. Roth RH. Functional occlusion for the orthodontist, Part I. J Clin Orthod. 1981; 15 (1): 32-51.

16. Balkwill FH. The best form and arrangement of artificial teeth for mastication. Br J Dent Sci. 9:278, 1886.

17. Sears VH. Centric jaw relation. Dent Dig. 1952; 58: 302.

18. Gysi A. The problem of articulation. Dent Cosmos. 1910; 52: 1.

19. Hanau RL. Dental engineering. Vol. I. part II. Buffalo, 1927, Hanau Engineering Co.

20. Tench RW. Interpretation and registration of mandibulomaxillary relations and their reproduction in an instrument. J Am Dent Assoc. 1926; 13: 1675.

21. Gysi A. Practical application of research results in denture construction. J Am Dent Assoc. 1927; 14: 409.

22. Roth RH. Functional occlusion for the orthodontist, Part II. J Clin Orthod. 1981; 15 (2): 100-123.

23. Roth RH. Functional occlusion for the orthodontist, Part III. J Clin Orthod. 1981; 15 (03): 174-198.

24. Lavine D, Kulbersh R, Bonner P, Pink FE. Reproducibility of the condylar position indicator. Semin Orthod. 2003; 9: 96-101.

25. Derakhshan M, Sadowsky C. A relatively minor adult case becomes significantly complex: a lesson in humility. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2001; 119: 546-553.

26. Ricketts RM. A study of change in temporomandibular relations associated with the treatment of Class II malocclusion. Am J Orthod. 1952; 38: 918-933.

27. Bishara SE. Class II malocclusions: diagnostic and clinical considerations with and without treatment. Semin Orthod. 2006; 12: 11-24.

28. Utt TW, Meyers CE Jr, Wierzba TF, Hondrum SO. A three-dimensional comparison of condylar position changes between centric relation and centric occlusion using the mandibular position indicator. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1995; 107: 298-308.

29. Crawford SD. Condylar axis position, as determined by the occlusion and measured by the CPI instrument, and signs and symptoms of temporomandibular dysfunction. Angle Orthod. 1999; 69 (2): 103-115.

30. Rinchuse DJ. Counterpoint: a three-dimensional comparison of condylar change between centric relation and centric occlusion using the mandibular position indicator. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1995; 107: 319-328.

31. McNamara JA Jr, Seligman DA, Okeson JP. Occlusion, orthodontic treatment, and temporomandibular disorders: a review. J Orofac Pain. 1995; 9 (1): 73-90.