medigraphic.com
ISSN 2395-9215 (Print)
Órgano Oficial de Difusión de la Facultad de Odontología de la UNAM

2018, Number 4

<< Back Next >>

Rev Mex Ortodon 2018; 6 (4)

Skeletal and dental treatment effects utilizing directional forces systems in Mexican adolescents

Gómez PGM, Vargas CN, Avitia DC, Téllez VA, Cisneros MJ

Language: Spanish
References: 24
Page: 216-223
PDF size: 310.70 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Objective: The purpose of this study was to compare skeletal and dental treatment effects of Directional Forces Systems in Mexican adolescents. Material and methods: We studied 57 Mexican adolescent patients who presented Angle class I or class II malocclusion and had four premolars extracted during treatment. Pretreatment and posttreatment records of these patients were matched by age (± 6 months) sex, malocclusion and treatment intervals (± 6 months) compared to 49 untreated controls from the Bolton-Brush Growth Study Center, Cleveland Ohio. The cephalograms of the two samples were traced, digitized and analyzed by descriptive cephalometric analysis and detailed regional superimposition. Results: The pairwise control of treatment differences were highly statistical significant different (p ‹ 0.001) in FMA, SNA and PFH. Changes in SNB, Z Angle, upper lip, total chin and PFH/AFH were also significantly different (p ‹ 0.05). Conclusions: Directional Forces Systems orthodontic treatment with vertical control has some favorable effect on mandibular growth, it modifies the direction of the developing patient growth potential, forwards rotation of the mandible, harmonizes the correction with normal growth process and enhances class I and corrects class II dental relationships. Tweed triangle control with the mandibular incisors uprighted over basal bone gives valid information to evaluate clinical treatment success.


REFERENCES

  1. Gebeck TR, Merrifield LL. Orthodontic diagnosis and treatment analysis-concepts and values part II. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1995; 107: 541-547.

  2. Merrifield LL. Dimensions of the denture: back to basics. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1994; 106: 535-542.

  3. Vaden JL. James Leonard Vaden. Dental Press J Orthod. 2010; 15: 25-44.

  4. Cambridge Dictionary. Cambridge University Press. 2016. [Accessed August 21,2016] Available from: http://dictionary.cambridge.org/fr/dictionnaire/anglais-francais/control_1.

  5. Lamarque SL. The importance of occlusal plane control during orthodontic mechanotherapy. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1995; 107: 548-558.

  6. Johnston LE. The value of information and the cost of uncertainty: who pays the bill? The OERF Newsletter. 1998; 37: 7-15.

  7. Gardner RA, Harris EF, Vaden JL. Postorthodontic dental changes: A longitudinal study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1998; 114: 581-586.

  8. Merrifield LL, Klontz HA, Vaden JL. Differential diagnostic analysis system. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1994; 106: 641-648.

  9. Merrifield LL. The systems of directional force. J Charles Tweed Int Found. 1982; 10: 15-29.

  10. Vaden JL, Dale JG, Klontz HA. The Tweed-Merrifield Edgewise appliance: philosophy, diagnosis, and treatment. In: Graber TM, Vanarsdall RL, editors. Orthodontics: current principles and techniques. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Saunders; 1994. p. 627-684.

  11. Bayirli B, Vaden JL, Johnston LE. Long-term mandibular skeletal and dental effects of standard Edgewise treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2013; 144: 682-690.

  12. Johnston LE. A statistical evaluation of cephalometric prediction. Angle Orthod. 1968; 38: 284-304.

  13. Greenberg LZ, Johnston LE. Computerized prediction: the accuracy of a contemporary long-range forecast. Am J Orthod. 1975; 67: 243-252.

  14. Hixon E, Klein P. Simplified mechanics: a means of treatment based on available scientific information. Am J Orthod. 1972; 62: 113-141.

  15. Schudy FF. The rotation of the mandible resulting from growth: its implications in orthodontic treatment. Angle Orthod. 1965; 35: 36-50.

  16. Tweed CH. Clinical orthodontics. Volumes. St. Louis: C.V. Mosby; 1966. p. 6-12.

  17. Boley JC. Preaching to the choir. J Charles Tweed Int Found. 2011; 10: 3-10.

  18. Horn AJ. Facial height index. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1992; 102: 180-186.

  19. Radziminski G. The control of horizontal planes in class II treatment. J Charles Int Tweed Found. 1987; 15: 125-139.

  20. Gebeck TR, Merrifield LL. Orthodontic diagnosis and treatment analysis-concepts and values part I. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1995; 107: 434-443.

  21. Cardiel Ríos SA. Correction of a severe class II malocclusion in a patient with Noonan syndrome. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2016; 150 (3): 511-520.

  22. Vaden JL, Harris EF, Sinclair PM. Clinical ramifications of posterior and anterior facial height changes between treated and untreated class II samples. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1994; 105: 438-443.

  23. Johnston LE. A comparative evaluation of several contemporary class II treatment strategies. The OERF Newsletter. 1995; 36: 12-14.

  24. Peck S. Extractions, retention and stability: the search for orthodontic truth. Eur J Orthod. 2017; 39 (2): 109-115.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com