Progress in orthodontics · 2014
Optimal parameters for final position of teeth in space closure in case of a missing upper lateral incisor.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Lombardo Luca, D'Ercole Antonio, Latini Michele Carmelo, Siciliani Giuseppe
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to provide clinical indications for the correct management of appliances in space closure treatment of patients with agenesis of the upper lateral incisors.
METHODS: Virtual setup for space closure was performed in 30 patients with upper lateral incisor agenesis. Tip, torque and in-out values were measured and compared with those of previous authors.
RESULTS: In the upper dentition, the tip values were comparable to those described by Andrews (Am J Orthod 62(3):296-309, 1972), except for at the first premolars, which require a greater tip, and the first molars, a lesser tip. The torque values showed no differences except for at the canines, where it was greater, and the in-out values were between those reported by Andrews and those by Watanabe et al. (The Shikwa Gakuho 96:209-222, 1996) (except for U3 and U4).
CONCLUSIONS: The following prescriptions are advisable: tip 5°, torque 8° and in-out 2.5 for U1; tip 9°, torque 3° and in-out 3.25 for U3; tip 10°, torque -8° and in-out 3.75 for U4; and tip 5°, torque -8° and in-out 4 for U5. Andrews' prescription is suitable for the lower jaw, except for at L6. It is also advisable to execute selective grinding (1.33±0.5 mm) and extrusion (0.68±0.23 mm) on the upper canine during treatment, and the first premolar requires some intrusion (0.56±0.30 mm).
METHODS: Virtual setup for space closure was performed in 30 patients with upper lateral incisor agenesis. Tip, torque and in-out values were measured and compared with those of previous authors.
RESULTS: In the upper dentition, the tip values were comparable to those described by Andrews (Am J Orthod 62(3):296-309, 1972), except for at the first premolars, which require a greater tip, and the first molars, a lesser tip. The torque values showed no differences except for at the canines, where it was greater, and the in-out values were between those reported by Andrews and those by Watanabe et al. (The Shikwa Gakuho 96:209-222, 1996) (except for U3 and U4).
CONCLUSIONS: The following prescriptions are advisable: tip 5°, torque 8° and in-out 2.5 for U1; tip 9°, torque 3° and in-out 3.25 for U3; tip 10°, torque -8° and in-out 3.75 for U4; and tip 5°, torque -8° and in-out 4 for U5. Andrews' prescription is suitable for the lower jaw, except for at L6. It is also advisable to execute selective grinding (1.33±0.5 mm) and extrusion (0.68±0.23 mm) on the upper canine during treatment, and the first premolar requires some intrusion (0.56±0.30 mm).