OBJECTIVE: To investigate the capacity of bidimensional techniques for torque control of anterior teeth in extraction cases. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two different bidimensional techniques were distinguished by nomenclature as bidimensional-slot (bDS) and bidimensional-wire (bDW), respectively. (1) In the clinical study, patients were randomly assigned to three groups (ie, bDS [n = 27], bDW [n = 24], and control [n = 25] groups). The major inclusion criterion was mild crowding in the upper arch, with the two upper first premolars (teeth 14 and 24) to be extracted. After space closure through standardized treatment, the torque of the upper central incisors (∠TQ _U1) was calculated using the angle formed by the base of the U1 bracket and the working archwire on cephalograms. (2) In the typodont study, a standardized setup of the upper dentition with teeth 14 and 24 extracted was established. The spaces were closed through water bath followed by elastics, using the bDW or the conventional (control) technique, respectively. In six replicate experiments, after space closure, the ∠TQ _U1 was measured on the standardized lateral photographs. RESULTS: (1) In the clinical study, after space closure, the ∠TQ_U1 was 9.4° ± 3.4° (bDS), 8.3° ± 3.3° (bDW), and 5.8° ± 2.9° (control), respectively. The ∠TQ_U1 of bDS and bDW were both significantly (P < .05) larger than that of the control, but no statistical difference was found between them. (2) In the typodont study, after space closure, the ∠TQ_U1 of bDW (8.5° ± 0.9°) was significantly (P < .01) larger than that of the control (4.9° ± 1.0°). CONCLUSION: The bDS and the bDW techniques may help enhance anterior torque control in extraction cases.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the capacity of bidimensional techniques for torque control of anterior teeth in extraction cases. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two different bidimensional techniques were distinguished by nomenclature as bidimensional-slot (bDS) and bidimensional-wire (bDW), respectively. (1) In the clinical study, patients were randomly assigned to three groups (ie, bDS [n = 27], bDW [n = 24], and control [n = 25] groups). The major inclusion criterion was mild crowding in the upper arch, with the two upper first premolars (teeth 14 and 24) to be extracted. After space closure through standardized treatment, the torque of the upper central incisors (∠TQ _U1) was calculated using the angle formed by the base of the U1 bracket and the working archwire on cephalograms. (2) In the typodont study, a standardized setup of the upper dentition with teeth 14 and 24 extracted was established. The spaces were closed through water bath followed by elastics, using the bDW or the conventional (control) technique, respectively. In six replicate experiments, after space closure, the ∠TQ _U1 was measured on the standardized lateral photographs. RESULTS: (1) In the clinical study, after space closure, the ∠TQ_U1 was 9.4° ± 3.4° (bDS), 8.3° ± 3.3° (bDW), and 5.8° ± 2.9° (control), respectively. The ∠TQ_U1 of bDS and bDW were both significantly (P < .05) larger than that of the control, but no statistical difference was found between them. (2) In the typodont study, after space closure, the ∠TQ_U1 of bDW (8.5° ± 0.9°) was significantly (P < .01) larger than that of the control (4.9° ± 1.0°). CONCLUSION: The bDS and the bDW techniques may help enhance anterior torque control in extraction cases.
Authors: Hisham M Badawi; Roger W Toogood; Jason P R Carey; Giseon Heo; Paul W Major Journal: Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop Date: 2008-05 Impact factor: 2.650
Authors: Amy Archambault; Ryan Lacoursiere; Hisham Badawi; Paul W Major; Jason Carey; Carlos Flores-Mir Journal: Angle Orthod Date: 2010-01 Impact factor: 2.079
Authors: Amy Archambault; Thomas W Major; Jason P Carey; Giseon Heo; Hisham Badawi; Paul W Major Journal: Angle Orthod Date: 2010-09 Impact factor: 2.079
Authors: Abdulkarim A Hatrom; Khalid H Zawawi; Reem M Al-Ali; Hanadi M Sabban; Talal M Zahid; Ghassan A Al-Turki; Ali H Hassan Journal: Angle Orthod Date: 2020-09-01 Impact factor: 2.079