Min-Ho Jung1. 1. Department of Orthodontics, Dental Research Institute and School of Dentistry, Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea. fortit@chol.com
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The effect of total arch distalization using orthodontic mini-implants (OMIs) combined with interproximal stripping (IPS) and second premolar extraction was investigated in Class I malocclusion patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 66 consecutively treated Class I malocclusion (Class I molar relationship; 0 mm < overbite and overjet < 4.5 mm) patients ranging in age from 17 to 44 years who received single-phase treatment were included in this study. Pre- and posttreatment lateral cephalograms and dental casts were measured and compared statistically. RESULTS: In the distalization with IPS group, 3.6 mm and 3.8 mm of crowding in the upper and lower arches, respectively, were resolved, and 3.8 mm and 3.2 mm of upper and lower incisor retraction, respectively, were achieved simultaneously by the treatment. As a result of the second premolar extraction treatment, 3.9 mm and 3.6 mm of crowding in the upper and lower arches, respectively, were resolved, and 3.3 mm and 3.2 mm of incisor retraction, respectively, were achieved during treatment. There was no statistically significant difference in the amount of crowding and incisor retraction between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Total arch distalization using an OMI with IPS did not yield a significantly different treatment result compared to second premolar extraction treatment.
OBJECTIVE: The effect of total arch distalization using orthodontic mini-implants (OMIs) combined with interproximal stripping (IPS) and second premolar extraction was investigated in Class I malocclusion patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 66 consecutively treated Class I malocclusion (Class I molar relationship; 0 mm < overbite and overjet < 4.5 mm) patients ranging in age from 17 to 44 years who received single-phase treatment were included in this study. Pre- and posttreatment lateral cephalograms and dental casts were measured and compared statistically. RESULTS: In the distalization with IPS group, 3.6 mm and 3.8 mm of crowding in the upper and lower arches, respectively, were resolved, and 3.8 mm and 3.2 mm of upper and lower incisor retraction, respectively, were achieved simultaneously by the treatment. As a result of the second premolar extraction treatment, 3.9 mm and 3.6 mm of crowding in the upper and lower arches, respectively, were resolved, and 3.3 mm and 3.2 mm of incisor retraction, respectively, were achieved during treatment. There was no statistically significant difference in the amount of crowding and incisor retraction between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Total arch distalization using an OMI with IPS did not yield a significantly different treatment result compared to second premolar extraction treatment.