Literature DB >> 10893471

Relapse in Angle Class II Division 1 Malocclusion treated by tandem mechanics without extraction of permanent teeth: A retrospective analysis.

J Yavari1, M K Shrout, C M Russell, A J Haas, E H Hamilton.   

Abstract

Ideal orthodontic treatment should achieve long-term stability of the occlusion. The mandibular incisor segment has been described as the segment that is most likely to exhibit relapse after treatment and retention. Therefore, relapse of this is a challenge that clinicians need to address. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the amount of relapse that may occur in Angle Class II Division 1 patients, treated orthodontically with tandem mechanics. All cases in this study were treated without extraction of permanent teeth, and the patients were followed for at least 2 years after the end of the retention phase of treatment. Six predictors were investigated at pretreatment, posttreatment, and postretention periods. A synopsis of this study shows the correction of lower incisor crowding as measured by the irregularity index was stable over 5.2 years of postretention follow-up; but longer follow-up time revealed increased relapse of incisor irregularity. Intermolar width increased during treatment and remained stable in the follow-up period. Overjet and overbite corrections and changes in the lower incisor to mandibular plane angle were also stable in the follow-up period. In addition, the amounts of overjet correction and loss of expansion of intercanine distance after treatment were associated with increased irregularity index in the follow-up period. It appears the discrepancies between this and previously published works are sufficiently dramatic that the whole question of treatment philosophy and long-term stability may need to be reevaluated.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10893471     DOI: 10.1067/mod.2000.104409

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop        ISSN: 0889-5406            Impact factor:   2.650


  3 in total

1.  Arch width changes in patients with Class II division 1 malocclusion treated with maxillary first premolar extraction and non-extraction method.

Authors:  Sajjad Shirazi; Mojgan Kachoei; Naiemeh Shahvaghar-Asl; Samaneh Shirazi; Reza Sharghi
Journal:  J Clin Exp Dent       Date:  2016-10-01

2.  Comparison of retention characteristics of Essix and Hawley retainers.

Authors:  Abdullah Demir; Hasan Babacan; Ruhi Nalcacı; Tolga Topcuoglu
Journal:  Korean J Orthod       Date:  2012-10-29       Impact factor: 1.372

3.  Thermoformed Retainer: An Effective Option for Long-Term Stability.

Authors:  A Giancotti; P Mozzicato; G Mampieri
Journal:  Case Rep Dent       Date:  2020-10-24
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.