Literature DB >> 1998297

Comparison of treatment effects with labial and lingual fixed appliances.

J C Gorman1, R J Smith.   

Abstract

Pretreatment and posttreatment lateral cephalometric radiographs were evaluated for 120 patients--40 from each of three private practices. Twenty patients from each office had been treated with labial fixed appliances and 20 with lingual fixed appliances. There were no significant differences between labial and lingual appliances with respect to the change of any cephalometric measurement during treatment (posttreatment value minus pretreatment value). Differences among patients from the three offices were found only for upper incisor vertical position, and these appeared to reflect differences in treatment objectives rather than in appliances. However, several significant differences were found when changes during treatment were evaluated according to extraction pattern, without reference to the type of appliance used. There was no evidence that the mechanics required with lingual appliances necessarily led to any changes in treatment results, as determined by the cephalometric measurements used in this study.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1991        PMID: 1998297     DOI: 10.1016/0889-5406(91)70002-E

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


  8 in total

1.  Perception of esthetic orthodontic appliances: An eye tracking and cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Moritz Försch; Lena Krull; Marlene Hechtner; Roman Rahimi; Susanne Wriedt; Heiner Wehrbein; Cornelius Jacobs; Collin Jacobs
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2019-08-12       Impact factor: 2.079

2.  Quantitative analysis of biofilm formation on labial and lingual bracket surfaces.

Authors:  Sila Bilgin Yener; Ömür Polat Özsoy
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2019-07-22       Impact factor: 2.079

Review 3.  Comparison of adverse effects between lingual and labial orthodontic treatment.

Authors:  Hu Long; Yang Zhou; Ujjwal Pyakurel; Lina Liao; Fan Jian; Junjie Xue; Niansong Ye; Xin Yang; Yan Wang; Wenli Lai
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2013-04-12       Impact factor: 2.079

4.  Speech performance and oral impairments with lingual and labial orthodontic appliances in the first stage of fixed treatment.

Authors:  Tarek Z Khattab; Hassan Farah; Rabab Al-Sabbagh; Mohammad Y Hajeer; Yaser Haj-Hamed
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2012-10-18       Impact factor: 2.079

5.  Outcome assessment of lingual and labial appliances compared with cephalometric analysis, peer assessment rating, and objective grading system in Angle Class II extraction cases.

Authors:  Toru Deguchi; Fumie Terao; Tomo Aonuma; Tomoki Kataoka; Yasuyo Sugawara; Takashi Yamashiro; Teruko Takano-Yamamoto
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2014-08-25       Impact factor: 2.079

6.  3D FEM comparison of lingual and labial orthodontics in en masse retraction.

Authors:  Luca Lombardo; Giuseppe Scuzzo; Angela Arreghini; Ozge Gorgun; Yıldız Oztürk Ortan; Giuseppe Siciliani
Journal:  Prog Orthod       Date:  2014-05-30       Impact factor: 2.750

7.  The Surgical Management of Skeletal Disproportion with Lingual Orthodontics and Three-dimensional Planning.

Authors:  Krutiben Patel; Chung How Kau; Peter D Waite; Ahmet Arif Celebi
Journal:  Ann Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2017 Jan-Jun

Review 8.  Are there differences in treatment effects between labial and lingual fixed orthodontic appliances? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Fadi Ata-Ali; Teresa Cobo; Felix De Carlos; Juan Cobo; Javier Ata-Ali
Journal:  BMC Oral Health       Date:  2017-11-22       Impact factor: 2.757

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.