Silvio-Augusto Bellini-Pereira1, Aron Aliaga-Del Castillo1, Lorena Vilanova1, Mayara-Paim Patel2, Rachelle-Simões Reis3, Roberto-Henrique-da Costa Grec3, José-Fernando-Castanha Henriques4, Guilherme Janson5. 1. DDS, MSc, Postgraduate Student. Department of Orthodontics. Bauru Dental School. University of São Paulo, Brazil. 2. DDS, MSc, PhD. Assistant Professor. Department of Orthodontics. University of Guarulhos, São Paulo, Brazil. 3. DDS, MSc, PhD. Department of Orthodontics. Bauru Dental School. University of São Paulo, Brazil. 4. DDS, MSc, PhD. Professor. Department of Orthodontics. Bauru Dental School. University of São Paulo, Brazil. 5. DDS, MSc, PhD. Professor and Head. Department of Orthodontics. Bauru Dental School, University of São Paulo, Brazil.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To compare the maxillary dentoalveolar changes of patients treated with three distalization force systems: Jones Jig, Distal Jet and First Class appliances, using digitized models. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The retrospective sample comprised 118 digitized models of 59 patients with Class II malocclusion divided into three groups: Group 1 consisted of 22 patients treated with the Jones Jig appliance; Group 2 consisted of 20 patients treated with the Distal Jet, and Group 3 comprised 17 patients treated with the First Class appliance. Pretreatment and post-distalization plaster models of all patients were digitized and evaluated with OrthoAnalyzerTM software. The pretreatment and post-distalization variables regarding sagittal, rotational and transverse changes were compared by the One-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and Kruskal-Wallis tests, depending on normality. RESULTS: All appliances presented similar amounts of distalization. The Distal Jet appliance promoted significantly smaller mesial displacement of premolars and greater expansion of posterior teeth. The First Class presented the smallest rotation of the maxillary molars and treatment time. CONCLUSIONS: The distalizers were effective in correcting Class II molar relationship, however, a palatal force seems to provide fewer undesirable effects. Additionally, the degree of rotation and expansion was associated with the side of force application. Key words:Malocclusion, Angle Class II, Orthodontics, Corrective, Distalizers. Copyright:
BACKGROUND: To compare the maxillary dentoalveolar changes of patients treated with three distalization force systems: Jones Jig, Distal Jet and First Class appliances, using digitized models. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The retrospective sample comprised 118 digitized models of 59 patients with Class II malocclusion divided into three groups: Group 1 consisted of 22 patients treated with the Jones Jig appliance; Group 2 consisted of 20 patients treated with the Distal Jet, and Group 3 comprised 17 patients treated with the First Class appliance. Pretreatment and post-distalization plaster models of all patients were digitized and evaluated with OrthoAnalyzerTM software. The pretreatment and post-distalization variables regarding sagittal, rotational and transverse changes were compared by the One-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and Kruskal-Wallis tests, depending on normality. RESULTS: All appliances presented similar amounts of distalization. The Distal Jet appliance promoted significantly smaller mesial displacement of premolars and greater expansion of posterior teeth. The First Class presented the smallest rotation of the maxillary molars and treatment time. CONCLUSIONS: The distalizers were effective in correcting Class II molar relationship, however, a palatal force seems to provide fewer undesirable effects. Additionally, the degree of rotation and expansion was associated with the side of force application. Key words:Malocclusion, Angle Class II, Orthodontics, Corrective, Distalizers. Copyright:
Authors: Gero S M Kinzinger; Norbert Gülden; Faruk Yildizhan; Peter R Diedrich Journal: Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop Date: 2009-10 Impact factor: 2.650
Authors: Mayara Paim Patel; José Fernando Castanha Henriques; Karina Maria Salvatore Freitas; Roberto Henrique da Costa Grec Journal: Dental Press J Orthod Date: 2014 May-Jun