Literature DB >> 1476109

The effectiveness of differential moments in establishing and maintaining anchorage.

A Hart1, L Taft, S N Greenberg.   

Abstract

The purpose of the present study is to both clinically and cephalometrically investigate maximum and minimum anchorage control in four first premolar extraction cases, using the "differential moments (torque)" concept. Data were obtained from the pretreatment and posttreatment lateral cephalometric radiographs of 30 patients, 13 boys and 17 girls, who were treated exclusively with "differential torque" mechanics. Of the 30 patients selected, 18 were classified as having Angle Class I malocclusion (crowded and/or bimaxillary alveolar protrusion) and 12 as having Angle Class II, Division 1 malocclusion (crowded and/or severe overjet). The sample was divided into two groups, according to the severity of crowding. Subjects with 6.0 mm or more of crowding, in at least one quadrant per arch, were placed in the maximum anchorage group, suggesting the desirability of maintaining a relatively stable position of the anchor unit. Subjects with less than 6.0 mm of crowding per quadrant were categorized as moderate or minimum anchorage cases, indicating desirability of some intermediate degree of controlled movement of the anchor teeth. Comparison of the two groups in each malocclusion category revealed their comparability with respect to molar relationship and incisor overjet. The major finding of this study is the clinical effectiveness of differential moments as a means of controlling intraoral anchorage. It proves to be optimal and controllable for clinical purposes, regardless of the type of malocclusion or the severity of crowding.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1992        PMID: 1476109     DOI: 10.1016/s0889-5406(05)81190-4

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


  7 in total

1.  A comparison of lower canine retraction and loss of anchorage between conventional and self-ligating brackets: a single-center randomized split-mouth controlled trial.

Authors:  André da Costa Monini; Luiz Gonzaga Gandini Júnior; Alexandre Protásio Vianna; Renato Parsekian Martins
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2016-05-31       Impact factor: 3.573

2.  Efficacy of Second Molar to Achieve Anchorage Control in Maximum Anchorage Cases.

Authors:  S M Londhe; P Kumar; R Mitra; A Kotwal
Journal:  Med J Armed Forces India       Date:  2011-07-21

Review 3.  [Different orthodontic anchorage systems. A critical examination].

Authors:  P Diedrich
Journal:  Fortschr Kieferorthop       Date:  1993-08

4.  [Force-moment measurements on the passive palatal arch under the influence of the tongue].

Authors:  T Ney; G Göz
Journal:  Fortschr Kieferorthop       Date:  1993-12

5.  A comparative anchorage control study between conventional and self-ligating bracket systems using differential moments.

Authors:  Marcio Rodrigues de Almeida; Francisco Herrero; Amine Fattal; Amirparviz R Davoody; Ravindra Nanda; Flavio Uribe
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2013-06-07       Impact factor: 2.079

6.  Factors predisposing to maxillary anchorage loss: a retrospective study of 1403 cases.

Authors:  Hong Su; Bing Han; Sa Li; Bin Na; Wen Ma; Tian-Min Xu
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-10-09       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  Canine retraction and anchorage loss: self-ligating versus conventional brackets in a randomized split-mouth study.

Authors:  André da Costa Monini; Luiz Gonzaga Gandini Júnior; Renato Parsekian Martins; Alexandre Protásio Vianna
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2014-03-04       Impact factor: 2.079

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.