Stability comparison of two different dentoalveolar expansion treatment protocols
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2017 |
Outros Autores: | |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics |
Texto Completo: | http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2176-94512017000500075 |
Resumo: | ABSTRACT Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the longitudinal stability of the conventional straight-wire system after the use of a quad-helix appliance with Damon self-ligating system in patients with Class I malocclusion. Methods: 27 adolescent patients were evaluated at three different periods: pre-treatment (T1), post-treatment (T2) and three years post-treatment (T3). Group 1 included 12 patients (with a mean age of 14.65 year) treated with Damon 3MX bracket system; and Group 2 included 15 patients (with a mean age of 14.8 year) who underwent orthodontic treatment with Roth prescribed brackets after expansion with Quad-Helix appliance. Relapse was evaluated with dental cast examination and cephalometric radiograph tracings. Statistical analysis was performed with IBM-SPSS for Windows software, version 21 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL). A p-value smaller than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: There were significant increases in all transverse dental and postero-anterior measurements (except for UL6-ML mm in Group 1) with active treatment. There was some significant relapse in the long-term in inter-canine width in both groups and in the inter-first premolar width in Group 2 (p< 0.05). Significant decrease in all frontal measurements from T2 to T3 was seen for both groups. Upper and lower incisors significantly proclined in T1-T2 (p<0.05), however no relapse was found for both groups. When two systems were compared, there was no significant difference for the long-term follow-up period. Conclusion: Conventional (quad-helix appliance with conventional brackets) and Damon systems were found similar with regard to the long-term incisor positions and transverse dimension changes of maxillary arch. |
id |
DPI-1_50dd8b798baecc5acf5720b81b094427 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:scielo:S2176-94512017000500075 |
network_acronym_str |
DPI-1 |
network_name_str |
Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Stability comparison of two different dentoalveolar expansion treatment protocolsConventional bracketsSelf-ligating bracketsStabilityABSTRACT Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the longitudinal stability of the conventional straight-wire system after the use of a quad-helix appliance with Damon self-ligating system in patients with Class I malocclusion. Methods: 27 adolescent patients were evaluated at three different periods: pre-treatment (T1), post-treatment (T2) and three years post-treatment (T3). Group 1 included 12 patients (with a mean age of 14.65 year) treated with Damon 3MX bracket system; and Group 2 included 15 patients (with a mean age of 14.8 year) who underwent orthodontic treatment with Roth prescribed brackets after expansion with Quad-Helix appliance. Relapse was evaluated with dental cast examination and cephalometric radiograph tracings. Statistical analysis was performed with IBM-SPSS for Windows software, version 21 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL). A p-value smaller than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: There were significant increases in all transverse dental and postero-anterior measurements (except for UL6-ML mm in Group 1) with active treatment. There was some significant relapse in the long-term in inter-canine width in both groups and in the inter-first premolar width in Group 2 (p< 0.05). Significant decrease in all frontal measurements from T2 to T3 was seen for both groups. Upper and lower incisors significantly proclined in T1-T2 (p<0.05), however no relapse was found for both groups. When two systems were compared, there was no significant difference for the long-term follow-up period. Conclusion: Conventional (quad-helix appliance with conventional brackets) and Damon systems were found similar with regard to the long-term incisor positions and transverse dimension changes of maxillary arch.Dental Press International2017-10-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2176-94512017000500075Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics v.22 n.5 2017reponame:Dental Press Journal of Orthodonticsinstname:Dental Press International (DPI)instacron:DPI10.1590/2177-6709.22.5.075-082.oarinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessAtik,EzgiTaner,Tülineng2019-07-26T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S2176-94512017000500075Revistahttp://www.scielo.br/dpjoONGhttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.phpartigos@dentalpress.com.br||davidnormando@hotmail.com2177-67092176-9451opendoar:2019-07-26T00:00Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics - Dental Press International (DPI)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Stability comparison of two different dentoalveolar expansion treatment protocols |
title |
Stability comparison of two different dentoalveolar expansion treatment protocols |
spellingShingle |
Stability comparison of two different dentoalveolar expansion treatment protocols Atik,Ezgi Conventional brackets Self-ligating brackets Stability |
title_short |
Stability comparison of two different dentoalveolar expansion treatment protocols |
title_full |
Stability comparison of two different dentoalveolar expansion treatment protocols |
title_fullStr |
Stability comparison of two different dentoalveolar expansion treatment protocols |
title_full_unstemmed |
Stability comparison of two different dentoalveolar expansion treatment protocols |
title_sort |
Stability comparison of two different dentoalveolar expansion treatment protocols |
author |
Atik,Ezgi |
author_facet |
Atik,Ezgi Taner,Tülin |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Taner,Tülin |
author2_role |
author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Atik,Ezgi Taner,Tülin |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Conventional brackets Self-ligating brackets Stability |
topic |
Conventional brackets Self-ligating brackets Stability |
description |
ABSTRACT Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the longitudinal stability of the conventional straight-wire system after the use of a quad-helix appliance with Damon self-ligating system in patients with Class I malocclusion. Methods: 27 adolescent patients were evaluated at three different periods: pre-treatment (T1), post-treatment (T2) and three years post-treatment (T3). Group 1 included 12 patients (with a mean age of 14.65 year) treated with Damon 3MX bracket system; and Group 2 included 15 patients (with a mean age of 14.8 year) who underwent orthodontic treatment with Roth prescribed brackets after expansion with Quad-Helix appliance. Relapse was evaluated with dental cast examination and cephalometric radiograph tracings. Statistical analysis was performed with IBM-SPSS for Windows software, version 21 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL). A p-value smaller than 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: There were significant increases in all transverse dental and postero-anterior measurements (except for UL6-ML mm in Group 1) with active treatment. There was some significant relapse in the long-term in inter-canine width in both groups and in the inter-first premolar width in Group 2 (p< 0.05). Significant decrease in all frontal measurements from T2 to T3 was seen for both groups. Upper and lower incisors significantly proclined in T1-T2 (p<0.05), however no relapse was found for both groups. When two systems were compared, there was no significant difference for the long-term follow-up period. Conclusion: Conventional (quad-helix appliance with conventional brackets) and Damon systems were found similar with regard to the long-term incisor positions and transverse dimension changes of maxillary arch. |
publishDate |
2017 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2017-10-01 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2176-94512017000500075 |
url |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S2176-94512017000500075 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
10.1590/2177-6709.22.5.075-082.oar |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
text/html |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Dental Press International |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Dental Press International |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics v.22 n.5 2017 reponame:Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics instname:Dental Press International (DPI) instacron:DPI |
instname_str |
Dental Press International (DPI) |
instacron_str |
DPI |
institution |
DPI |
reponame_str |
Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics |
collection |
Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics - Dental Press International (DPI) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
artigos@dentalpress.com.br||davidnormando@hotmail.com |
_version_ |
1754122398045569024 |