medigraphic.com
ISSN 2007-462X (Print)
Organo de divulgación Científica de la Unidad Académica de Odontología de la Universidad Autónoma de Nayarit (UAN)

2020, Number 24

<< Back Next >>

Rev Tame 2020; 8.9 (24)

Factores determinantes de frecuencia de extracción en técnica de brackets de autoligado vs convencionales

Borrego GLL, Carreón CR

Language: Spanish
References: 23
Page: 978-980
PDF size: 113.07 Kb.


ABSTRACT

The treatment of certain malocclusions requires dental extractions prior to a dental, facial and skeletal diagnosis. This retrospective and descriptive study aimed to identify the determinants of extraction frequency using self-ligating versus conventional braces. Method: The sample consisted of 180 records of patients with conventional brackets and 180 of self-ligating, of a particular Postgraduate of Orthodontics in Puebla from 2013 to 2017, who met the inclusion criteria. Results: It was found that the determining factor of extraction for the self-ligating bracket technique was severe crowding and for the conventional bracket technique it was the class II canine relationship, the convex profile, the moderate to severe crowding and the decreased overbite; and to what was found a statistically significant association (p ‹0.05%) of these. We found 39.7% (143 patient records) with extractions and 60.3% (217 patient records) without extractions. Conclusion: The number of orthodontic cases with extractions varied according to the determining factors in each technique. The factor that influenced the probability of extraction for the self-ligating bracket technique was severe crowding, while for the conventional bracket technique it was the class II canine relationship, the convex profile, the moderate-severe crowding and the decreased overbite. (less than 2mm).


REFERENCES

  1. Proffit WR. Ortodoncia contemporánea: teoría y práctica. 3ra ed. Madrid: Elsevier; 2001.

  2. Domínguez-Mompell MR, García-Camba Varela P, Varela Morales M. Extracciones en ortodoncia: puesta al día. Cient Dent. 2015; 12;1:77-84.

  3. Travess H, Roberts-Harryand J. Sandy Orthodontics. Part 8: Extractions in orthodontics. British Dental Journal. 2004; 196 (4):

  4. Rocha A, Cedeño RI. Estrategia de extracciones en el tratamiento ortodóntico. Ortodon actual 2012; 9(33):4-14.

  5. Graham JW. The hotseat. Extractions. J Clin Orthod, 2013; 47:453-454.

  6. Uribe G. Ortodoncia Teoría y clínica. Medellín, Colombia: CIB; 2004: 267-80.

  7. Arteche P, Echandia GO, Sierra Á, Aristizábal JF, Rey D. Consideraciones importantes de la ortodoncia con brackets de autoligado versus ligado convencional. Rev Esp Ortod, 2015; 45(2): 93-100.

  8. Janson G, Valarelli DP, Valarelli FP, de Freitas MR, Pinzan A. Atypicalextraction of maxillary central incisors. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 2010; 138: 510-517.

  9. Valverde R, Mickle U, Valverde S. Extracción vs no extracción: el dilema en ortodoncia y los cuatro determinantes de extracción. Odontol pediatr. , 2012; 11(2): 125-135.

  10. Bernabe E, Sheiham A, Oliveira C. Condition specific impacts on quality of life attributed to malocclusion by adolescents with normal occlusion and Class I, II and III malocclusion. Angle Orthod. 2008; 78(6):977-82.

  11. Bachur R. Tratamiento de discrepancias mandibulares clase III, técnica de Obwegeser-Dal Pont modificada. Salud bucal. 2010;(118):20-6.

  12. Gomez V, Fernandez A, Perez H. Caracteristicas cefalometricas presentes en la maloclusion clase I en el Departamento de Ortodoncia de la DEPeI. Revista Odontologica Mexicana. 2011; 15 (1): 14-20.

  13. Meneghini, Fabio. Clinical Facial Analysis, elements, principles, techniques. Ed. Springer. Berlin, Germany; 2005.

  14. Ricketts Robert Morroy. Cephalometric Synthesis. AM J ORTHOD. 1960: 647-673.

  15. Vejar LF, Gutiérrez-Rojo JF, López-Guzmán M, Rivas-Gutiérrez R. Línea estética de Ricketts en las diferentes maloclusiones. Revista Española de Ortodoncia. 2016: 46 (1): 33-37.

  16. Harfin J. Indicaciones y contraindicaciones del desgaste proximal en el tratamiento de los apiñamientos del paciente adulto: Médica Panamericana Argentina. 1999:69-70.

  17. Van der Linden F. Theoretical and practical aspects of crowding in the human dentition. J Am Dent Assoc. 1974; 89: 139-153.

  18. Sánchez R. S., et al. Influencia de los incisivos en forma de pala en el overjet. Odontol. pediatr. 2016; 15 (2): 100- 7.

  19. Gregoret J. Ortodoncia y Cirugía Ortognática. "diagnóstico y planificación." Barcelona: Espaxs 1997; 227-32.

  20. Dardengo CDS, Fernandes LQ, Capelli J. Frequency of orthodontic extraction. Dental press journal of orthodontics. 2016; 21(1): 54-59.

  21. Konstantonis D, Anthopoulou C, Makou M. Extraction decision and identification of treatment predictors in Class I malocclusions. Progress in orthodontics. 2013; 14(1): 47.

  22. Toruño M. Tratamientos de ortodoncia con extracciones dentales en pacientes de la especialidad de ortodoncia UNAN-León 2007-2010, 2015.

  23. Jackson TH, Guez C, Lin FC, Proffit WR, Ko CC. Extraction frequencies at a university orthodontic clinic in the 21st century: Demographic and diagnostic factors affecting the likelihood of extraction. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. 2017; 151(3): 456-462.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com