INTRODUCTION: Although stability of anterior open-bite extraction and nonextraction treatment has been investigated, results suggesting that extraction treatment is more stable have not been confronted. Therefore, the purpose of this cephalometric study was to compare the long-term stability of anterior open-bite extraction and nonextraction treatment in the permanent dentition. METHODS: Group 1 consisted of 21 patients treated without extractions, and group 2 included 31 patients treated with extractions who had orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances. Cephalometric headplates were obtained at pretreatment, posttreatment, and postretention. The groups were compared at these 3 times and during the treatment and posttreatment periods with independent t tests. The number of patients with a clinically significant relapse of the open bite was compared between the groups with chi-square tests. RESULTS: During treatment, the maxillary incisors had greater retraction amounts, and the mandibular incisors had greater retraction and lingual tipping, and less extrusion in the extraction group. In the posttreatment period, the extraction group demonstrated statistically greater stability of the overbite. However, there was no statistically significant difference in the percentages of patients with clinically significant relapse of the open bite between the groups. CONCLUSION: Open-bite extraction treatment has greater stability of the overbite than open-bite nonextraction treatment.
INTRODUCTION: Although stability of anterior open-bite extraction and nonextraction treatment has been investigated, results suggesting that extraction treatment is more stable have not been confronted. Therefore, the purpose of this cephalometric study was to compare the long-term stability of anterior open-bite extraction and nonextraction treatment in the permanent dentition. METHODS: Group 1 consisted of 21 patients treated without extractions, and group 2 included 31 patients treated with extractions who had orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances. Cephalometric headplates were obtained at pretreatment, posttreatment, and postretention. The groups were compared at these 3 times and during the treatment and posttreatment periods with independent t tests. The number of patients with a clinically significant relapse of the open bite was compared between the groups with chi-square tests. RESULTS: During treatment, the maxillary incisors had greater retraction amounts, and the mandibular incisors had greater retraction and lingual tipping, and less extrusion in the extraction group. In the posttreatment period, the extraction group demonstrated statistically greater stability of the overbite. However, there was no statistically significant difference in the percentages of patients with clinically significant relapse of the open bite between the groups. CONCLUSION: Open-bite extraction treatment has greater stability of the overbite than open-bite nonextraction treatment.
Authors: J T Zupnik; M Ioshida; M Yatabe; A C O Ruellas; L R Gomes; S Aronovich; E Benavides; S P Edwards; B Paniagua; L H S Cevidanes Journal: Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg Date: 2019-02-01 Impact factor: 2.789
Authors: Tate H Jackson; Camille Guez; Feng-Chang Lin; William R Proffit; Ching-Chang Ko Journal: Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop Date: 2017-03 Impact factor: 2.650
Authors: Lauren S Todoki; Samuel A Finkleman; Ellen Funkhouser; Geoffrey M Greenlee; Kelly W Choi; Hsiu-Ching Ko; Hsuan-Fang Wang; Peter A Shapiro; Roozbeh Khosravi; Camille Baltuck; Veerasathpurush Allareddy; Calogero Dolce; Chung How Kau; Kyungsup Shin; Jaime de Jesus-Vinas; Michael Vermette; Cameron Jolley; Greg J Huang Journal: Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop Date: 2020-12 Impact factor: 2.650
Authors: Kelly W Choi; Hsiu-Ching Ko; Lauren S Todoki; Samuel A Finkleman; Roozbeh Khosravi; Hsuan-Fang Wang; Ellen Funkhouser; Camille Baltuck; Vishnu Raj; Veerasathpurush Allareddy; John C Matunas; Michael E Vermette; William E Harrell; Jorge C Coro; Geoffrey M Greenlee; Greg J Huang Journal: Angle Orthod Date: 2018-09-12 Impact factor: 2.079