Evaluation of the variable anchorage straightwire technique using Ricketts' growth prediction

Treatment effects of Reverse Twin-Block and Reverse Pull Face Mask on craniofacial morphology in early and late mixed dentition children

OBJECTIVE

Reverse Twin-Block (RTB) and Reverse Pull Face Mask (RPFM) appliances are used to correct Class III malocclusion in growing patients. Aim of this retrospective study was to compare and analyse craniofacial changes produced by RTB and RPFM in the early and late mixed dentition in Malay children with Class III malocclusion.

METHODS

Data consisted of pre- and post-treatment lateral cephalograms of 95 children, 49 patients with RTB and 46 patients with RPFM, divided into an early (8-9 year) and late (10-11 year) group. Treatment changes were assessed by the Ricketts analysis using CASSOS software, where 71 anatomic landmarks were identified in each cephalogram. Paired and independent t tests were performed for statistical comparison.

RESULTS

Paired t test revealed significant changes in facial axis, facial angle, MD plane to FH, lower facial height, mandibular arc, maxillary convexity, U1 to APog, L1 to APog, L1 to APog angle and upper lip to E-plane measurements in RPFM, whereas significant changes were found in facial taper, U1 to APog and lower lip to E-plane values with RTB in the early treatment group. Independent t test revealed significant changes in U1 to APog, L1 to APog and U6 to PtV values in the RTB group. Post-treatment comparison of RTB and RPFM showed significant differences in L1 to APog and L1 to APog angle values.

CONCLUSIONS

RPFM revealed more favourable craniofacial changes than RTB, particularly in the late mixed dentition stage.

Assessment of vertical changes during maxillary expansion using quad helix or bonded rapid maxillary expander

OBJECTIVE

To determine if there is a significantly different effect on vertical changes during phase I palatal expansion treatment using a quad helix and a bonded rapid maxillary expander in growing skeletal Class I and Class II patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective study looked at 2 treatment groups, a quad helix group and a bonded rapid maxillary expander group, before treatment (T1) and at the completion of phase I treatment (T2). Each treatment group was compared to an untreated predicted growth model. Lateral cephalograms at T1 and T2 were traced and analyzed for changes in vertical dimension.

RESULTS

No differences were found between the treatment groups at T1, but significant differences at T2 were found for convexity, lower facial height, total facial height, facial axis, and Frankfort Mandibular Plane Angle (FMA) variables. A comparison of treatment groups at T2 to their respective untreated predicted growth models found a significant difference for the lower facial height variable in the quad helix group and for the upper first molar to palatal plane (U6-PP) variable in the bonded expander group.

CONCLUSION

Overall, both the quad helix expander and the bonded rapid maxillary expander showed minimal vertical changes during palatal expansion treatment. The differences at T2 suggested that the quad helix expander had more control over skeletal vertical measurements. When comparing treatment results to untreated predicted growth values, the quad helix expander appeared to better maintain lower facial height and the bonded rapid maxillary expander appeared to better maintain the maxillary first molar vertical height.

Tooth loss caused by displaced elastic during simple preprosthetic orthodontic treatment

The use of elastics to close a diastema or correct tooth malpositions can create unintended consequences if not properly controlled. The American Association of Orthodontists recently issued a consumer alert, warning of “a substantial risk for irreparable damage” from a new trend called “do-it-yourself” orthodontics, consisting of patients autonomously using elastics to correct tooth position. The elastics can work their way below the gums and around the roots of the teeth, causing damage to the periodontium and even resulting in tooth loss. The cost of implants to replace these teeth would well exceed the cost of proper orthodontic care. This damage could also occur in a dental office, when a general dentist tries to perform a simplified orthodontic correction of a minor tooth malposition. The present case report describes a case of tooth loss caused by a displaced intraoral elastic, which occurred during a simple preprosthetic orthodontic treatment.