Journal of the American Dental Association (1939) · 2015
Mandibular molar protraction as an alternative treatment for edentulous spaces: Focus on changes in root length and alveolar bone height.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание 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.
Kim Sung-Jin, Sung Eui-Hyang, Kim Jin-Wook, Baik Hyoung-Seon, Lee Kee-Joon
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The authors conducted a retrospective cohort study to investigate external apical root resorption (EARR) and alveolar bone loss (ABL) after protraction of the mandibular molars by using miniscrews.
METHODS: The authors protracted 51 mandibular molars in 37 adults into an edentulous area by using sliding mechanics with a lever arm or a miniscrew-supported root spring. The authors measured root length and alveolar bone height on panoramic radiographs and corrected according to the crown length registration method. The authors measured the amounts of crown movement (CM) and root movement (RM) on the superimposed lateral cephalometric radiographs along the mandibular occlusal plane. The authors used a linear mixed model to determine the risk factors for EARR and ABL.
RESULTS: All edentulous spaces closed successfully in an average of 31.7 months, and the average CM and RM were 4.97 and 8.64 millimeters, respectively, with an RM:CM ratio of 2.81. The root length decreased significantly by 0.80 mm (5.53%), but EARR of more than 2 mm occurred in only 4.0% of molars. The alveolar bone height was reduced significantly by 0.56 mm, but ABL of more than 2 mm occurred in only 2.0% of molars. Linear mixed model results revealed that EARR and ABL correlated only with RM and age, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Protraction of the mandibular molars into an edentulous area by using miniscrews was effective and safe, especially in younger adults.
PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: Protraction of the mandibular molars can be considered as an alternative treatment to conventional prosthetic treatment in the restoration of edentulous space, especially in young adults, if patients accept longer treatment duration.
METHODS: The authors protracted 51 mandibular molars in 37 adults into an edentulous area by using sliding mechanics with a lever arm or a miniscrew-supported root spring. The authors measured root length and alveolar bone height on panoramic radiographs and corrected according to the crown length registration method. The authors measured the amounts of crown movement (CM) and root movement (RM) on the superimposed lateral cephalometric radiographs along the mandibular occlusal plane. The authors used a linear mixed model to determine the risk factors for EARR and ABL.
RESULTS: All edentulous spaces closed successfully in an average of 31.7 months, and the average CM and RM were 4.97 and 8.64 millimeters, respectively, with an RM:CM ratio of 2.81. The root length decreased significantly by 0.80 mm (5.53%), but EARR of more than 2 mm occurred in only 4.0% of molars. The alveolar bone height was reduced significantly by 0.56 mm, but ABL of more than 2 mm occurred in only 2.0% of molars. Linear mixed model results revealed that EARR and ABL correlated only with RM and age, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Protraction of the mandibular molars into an edentulous area by using miniscrews was effective and safe, especially in younger adults.
PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: Protraction of the mandibular molars can be considered as an alternative treatment to conventional prosthetic treatment in the restoration of edentulous space, especially in young adults, if patients accept longer treatment duration.