Factors associated with the maxillary third molar position after total arch distalization using a modified C-palatal plate in adolescents

Evaluation of the effect of extraction in comparison to distalization on the maxillary third molars in class II malocclusion: a retrospective study

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effects of first premolar extraction versus distalization on the vertical position and mesiodistal angulation of maxillary third molars (MxM3) in adolescent class II patients.

METHODS

The panoramic x-rays (OPGs) of 200 adolescent class II patients with developing MxM3s were screened. The chosen sample consisted of 2 groups: Group 1 (Distalization) comprising 48 MxM3s, and Group 2 (Extraction) comprising 50 MxM3s. The pre- and post-treatment OPGs were traced to detect the mesiodistal angulation changes of the second molars (MxM2) and MxM3s.

RESULTS

The angulation and vertical position of the MxM3s at T0 & T1 were also evaluated using Archer's classification. The distalization group presented a non-significant decrease in the mean angulation of MxM2 and MxM3 (-2.4o & -4.5o uprighting respectively). In the extraction group, both MxM2 and MxM3 presented a highly significant decrease in the mean angulation (-10.5o & -11o uprighting respectively). The angulation and vertical position change of MxM3 significantly improved in the extraction group when compared to the distalization group (P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Significant uprighting and occlusal positioning of the maxillary third molars occurred in the premolar extraction treatment group when compared to the distalization treatment group. The results of the current study highlight the importance of recognizing maxillary third molars during orthodontic treatment planning of Class II malocclusion cases.

Palatal approach for surgical removal of mesioangularly impacted maxillary third molar - a pilot study

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to investigate the application of the palatal approach for surgical removal of IMTM, and to evaluate its success rate, surgical duration, postoperative outcomes, and incidence of complications.

METHOD

Patients with mesioangularly IMTM (Archer Classification Class B) in the none-buccal position to the adjacent second molar, which were indicated for surgical removal, were enrolled in this study. The patients were assigned into two groups according to the surgical approach: the buccal or palatal approach. The impacted tooth positions, diagnosis, past dental and medical history, and radiographic examination were recorded pre-operatively. The duration, surgery details, and surgical complications were documented during the surgery.

RESULT

40 teeth were enrolled in our study. All teeth were removed completely. The operation time was significantly shorter in the palatal approach group compared to the buccal approach group (13.3 ± 2.8 min vs. 22.3 ± 5.5 min, P<0.001). The incidence of traumatic ulcers of the lips was significantly higher in the buccal approach group than in the palatal approach group (7/20 vs. 0/20, P = 0.008).

CONCLUSION

It is more efficient to perform surgery with a palatal approach if a Class B mesioangularly IMTM is located in the non-buccal aspect of the adjacent second molar.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ChiCTR2000040063.

Long-Term CBCT Evaluation of Mandibular Third Molar Changes after Distalization in Adolescents

Introduction: This study aimed to evaluate mandibular molar changes after distalization using Class III elastics and modified C-palatal plates (MCPPs) in the maxilla and to use CBCT to specifically analyze the third-molar position after long-term retention in adolescents. Methods: The sample consisted of 65 mandibular third molars from 35 subjects, divided into two groups. Twenty-six of the third molars were from fourteen adolescent patients with Class I bimaxillary protrusion (mean age, 12.8 years) who had undergone bilateral maxillary distalization using an MCPP and mandibular distalization with Class III elastics with non-extraction treatment. For the control group, 39 third molars from 21 Class I normal-occlusion subjects were used. In the treated group, CBCT images were taken before distalization (T1), after molar distalization (T2), and at a long-term observation point (6.1 ± 2.7 years) (T3). Repeated measures ANOVA and a post hoc test with Bonferroni correction were used to analyze significant differences in the positions at the three points in time. Results: There were 2.3 and 1.7 mm of distal movement at the crown of the mandibular first and second molars, with distal tipping of 5.2° and 5.3°, respectively, and 3.0° of distal tipping of the third molars. Comparing the treated group with the control group at T3, there was a significant change in the angulation of the third molars (p < 0.001). In the long-term, the third molars from the treated group showed a downward and buccal position after distalization. Conclusions: In the long term, the developing mandibular third molar buds had downward and buccal positional changes after total arch distalization. These findings suggest the need for clinicians to consider the possibility of the impaction of developing third molars after mandibular total arch distalization in adolescents.

A Simple Technique Using a Modified Nance Appliance as Anchorage for Maxillary Molar Distalization—Two Case Reports

Maxillary molar distalization to correct a dental Class II molar relationship and to create space to relieve crowding has been a long-lasting subject of debate in orthodontics. Generally, to distalize maxillary molars, an intra-arch distalization appliance is favored over an inter-arch appliance since it does not utilize mandibular dentition as an anchorage, so some unwanted side effects on mandibular incisors can be avoided. A variety of intra-arch appliances have been developed to distalize maxillary molars, such as the pendulum, Jones jig, first class appliance, distal jet, and modified C-palatal plate. Although they could achieve efficient molar distalization, the learning curve of proper appliance insertion and activation is relatively long. In addition, the appliances are not comfortable for the patients due to the bulky activation units, especially when the activation units are designed in the palatal area. The current manuscript describes a novel and effective maxillary intra-arch molar distalization appliance—a modified Nance appliance technique, which consists of: (1) palatally, a big acrylic button against the palatal rugae and connected to the premolars with wide mesh pads; (2) buccally, regular brackets on maxillary premolars and first molars with sectional round stainless steel archwires and open coil springs between the second premolar and first molar. Either bilateral or unilateral maxillary molar distalization can be achieved with this appliance, and the Class II elastics are not needed. It is simple to be fabricated, delivered, and activated, and it is comfortable for patients.

Changes in third molar position after Class II subdivision malocclusion treatment with asymmetric extractions

INTRODUCTION

This study aimed to assess the changes in third molars angulation and their available space after Class II subdivision malocclusion treatment with asymmetric premolar extractions.

METHODS

The sample consisted of 37 patients (17 male, 20 female and mean age 13.18 ± 1.99 years) in group 1 (Type 1 Class II subdivision) and 25 (10 male, 15 female, mean age 13.56 ± 2.46 years) in group 2 (Type 2 Class II subdivision). In group 1, extractions were performed in the two maxillary quadrants and in the Class I mandibular quadrant. In group 2, extraction was performed in the Class II maxillary quadrant. Panoramic radiographs were used to evaluate third molar angulations and their available space pre- and post-treatment. Radiographic measurements were performed with Dolphin^® Imaging 11.9. Paired t tests were used for intragroup comparison between stages and sides.

RESULTS

In Type 1, there were similar improvements in third molar angulations and increases in the space available on the extraction quadrants in the maxillary arch. In the mandibular arch, there was significantly greater improvement in angulation and greater space availability in the extraction quadrant after treatment. In Type 2, there was significantly greater improvement in angulation and available space for the maxillary third molar on the extraction quadrant. In the mandibular arch, there was a similar improvement in the available space for the third molars.

CONCLUSIONS

After treatment, both groups presented better angulation and significantly greater space for third molar eruptions on the extraction quadrants, when compared to the homologous non-extraction quadrants.

Comparison of treatment effects from total arch distalization using modified C-palatal plates versus maxillary premolar extraction in Class II patients with severe overjet

INTRODUCTION

This study aimed to compare the skeletodental and soft tissue changes with total arch distalization using a modified C-palatal plate (MCPP) and maxillary first premolar extraction treatment in Class II malocclusion patients with severe overjet.

SETTING AND SAMPLE POPULATION

The sample consisted of 46 adult patients who had Class II Division 1 malocclusion with severe overjet; 25 of them received non-extraction treatment with MCPPs (age, 22.5 ± 7.2 years), and 21 received maxillary first premolar extraction treatment (age 23.4 ± 6.5 years).

METHOD

A total of 26 variables were measured on pre- and post-treatment lateral cephalograms. To evaluate the differences between pretreatment and post-treatment in each group, t tests and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were used. To compare the amount of change between the two groups, MANOVA test was used.

RESULTS

The overjet was significantly reduced in the MCPP and extraction groups by 4.8 mm and 5.4 mm, respectively. However, the two groups had no significant difference in the sagittal, vertical and angular changes of the maxillary incisors. In addition, regarding soft tissue changes, the MCPP and extraction groups showed an increased nasolabial angle of 7.5° and 9.4°, decreased upper lip to the true vertical line of 1.8 mm and 2.2 mm, respectively (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

There was no significant difference in the skeletal changes between the MCPP and extraction groups, and the reduction in overjet was similar in the groups. These results suggest that MCPP might be a viable treatment option for total arch distalization in Class II malocclusion patients with severe overjet.