Influência de exodontias de pré-molares no perfil facial

• Autor(a) principal: Allgayer, Susiane
• Data de Publicação: 2010
• Tipo de documento: Dissertação
• Idioma: por
• Título da fonte: Repositório Institucional PUCRS
• Texto Completo: http://hdl.handle.net/10923/445
• topic: ODONTOLOGIA; ORTODONTIA CORRETIVA; ORTOPEDIA FACIAL; EXODONTIA; ESTÉTICA FACIAL

This work intends to evaluate retrospectively patients treated with premolar extraction through cephalometric analysis in lateral skull teleradiography, verifying the effects of different extraction protocols in the facial profile. For that, 87 patients, from a private clinic by three orthodontists certified by the Brazilian Board of Orthodontics and Facial Orthopedics, treated with Edgewise fixed appliances, were divided into three groups according to the sequence of premolar extraction utilized: 22 patients treated with extraction of the upper first premolars (40), 43 patients treated with extraction of the four first premolars (44) and 22 treated with extraction of the upper first premolars and lower second premolars (45). The cephalometric traces were digitalized using the software Dentofacial Planner Plus. In the evaluation, using the “Holdaway Analysis”, the t-student test showed betterment in the facial profile, in all groups. When comparing the groups, ANOVA revealed that only the lower lip sulcus depth relating to the H-line showed differences in the additional changes brought by the treatment, in which the group 44 showed a significantly superior difference relating to the group 40. From the results of the ANOVA test, we verified that the pre-treatment characteristics have potential to influence the final result. The “Z Angle” and the “Burstone line” were used to quantify and compare the profiles before and after the groups’ treatment. The tstudent test showed betterment in all groups, as the value of the Z angle was higher in the end of the treatment and the lips measures were in accordance to the values preconized by Burstone. When comparing the changes brought by the treatment, ANOVA revealed that there was no significant difference among the groups. The results were influenced by the pre-treatment characteristics, groups 40 and 44 showed more convex profiles at the end of the treatment than the group 45, what was already seen before in the pre-treatment; however, ANOVA didn’t verify significant difference among the values when comparing the three groups. We concluded that the protocols produce similar results and characteristics in the pre-treatment have great influence in the final result since that, in the end of the treatment, facial characteristics tend to remain.