M Fontana1, M Cozzani2, S Mutinelli3, R Spena4, A Caprioglio5. 1. Private Practice, La Spezia, Italy. 2. School of Dental Medicine, University of Cagliari, Cagliari, Italy. 3. Private Practice, Trento, Italy. 4. University of Ferrara, Ferrara, Italy. 5. Department of Surgical and Morphological Sciences, School of Medicine, University of Insubria, Varese, Italy.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate dento-skeletal changes following conventional anchorage molar distalization therapy in adult patients. SETTING AND SAMPLE POPULATION: Thirty-three patients (25 women, mean age 23 years 1 months ± 3 months; 8 men, mean age 28 years 3 months ± 7 months) were recruited from 4 Board Certified specialists. All subjects underwent molar distalization therapy using intra-oral distalizing appliances. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Cephalometric headfilms were available for all subjects before (T1) and at the end of comprehensive treatment (T2). The initial and final measurements and treatment changes were compared by means of a paired t-test. RESULTS: Mean total treatment time was 3 years 2 months ± 6 months. Maxillary first molar distalized 2.9 ± 0.6 mm contributing 64.4% to Class II molar correction, whereas mandibular first molar showed a concomitant mesial movement of 1.6 ± 0.5 mm. Maxillary incisors retroclined an average of 5.8° ± 3.9°, lower incisors proclined 4.1° ± 1.1° and the occlusal plane rotated downwards and backwards 1.8° ± 2.1°. Clockwise rotation of the mandible (1.7° ± 0.5°) and increase in lower facial height (2.5 ± 1.5 mm) were also observed. CONCLUSIONS: Maxillary molar distalization therapy can be successfully performed in adult patients despite a slight increase in vertical facial dimension should be considered.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate dento-skeletal changes following conventional anchorage molar distalization therapy in adult patients. SETTING AND SAMPLE POPULATION: Thirty-three patients (25 women, mean age 23 years 1 months ± 3 months; 8 men, mean age 28 years 3 months ± 7 months) were recruited from 4 Board Certified specialists. All subjects underwent molar distalization therapy using intra-oral distalizing appliances. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Cephalometric headfilms were available for all subjects before (T1) and at the end of comprehensive treatment (T2). The initial and final measurements and treatment changes were compared by means of a paired t-test. RESULTS: Mean total treatment time was 3 years 2 months ± 6 months. Maxillary first molar distalized 2.9 ± 0.6 mm contributing 64.4% to Class II molar correction, whereas mandibular first molar showed a concomitant mesial movement of 1.6 ± 0.5 mm. Maxillary incisors retroclined an average of 5.8° ± 3.9°, lower incisors proclined 4.1° ± 1.1° and the occlusal plane rotated downwards and backwards 1.8° ± 2.1°. Clockwise rotation of the mandible (1.7° ± 0.5°) and increase in lower facial height (2.5 ± 1.5 mm) were also observed. CONCLUSIONS: Maxillary molar distalization therapy can be successfully performed in adult patients despite a slight increase in vertical facial dimension should be considered.