Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology and oral radiology · 2021
Does molar distalization by the Beneslider have skeletal and dental impacts? A prospective 3D analysis.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Longerich Ulrich J J, Thurau Matthias, Grill Florian, Stimmer Herbert, Gahl Christina M, Kolk Andreas
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: The study aimed to clarify (1) the effect of the Beneslider distalization appliance on maxillary molars (M1+2), (2) the type of tooth movement, and (3) changes in skeletal parameters.
STUDY DESIGN: Dental distalization paths and transversal changes were measured according to the distance of the pterygoid vertical as well as on the virtualized 3D plaster model.
RESULTS: Distalization of the second premolar (P2; T1 - T2) was 2.51 mm (±1.81 mm; P < .001) combined with a distal tipping of 6.50° (±5.09°; P < .001), whereas for M1 a distalization of 3.49 mm (±1.10 mm) occurred with negligible tipping (0.73° ± 5.04°). No significant differences (T1 - T2) on sagittal and vertical skeletal variables were found within or between G1+2. In contrast, a significant increase in N-Sp' in G2 and in Sp'-Gn in G1+2 with consecutive Hasund index reduction was shown. Comparing T1 and T2, the device had an effect on the transversal development.
CONCLUSION: The Beneslider distalization appliance causes an effective distalization of M1+2, with slight second premolar tipping. No modification of skeletal parameters was recorded, but a relevant effect on Hasund index and the transverse was found.
STUDY DESIGN: Dental distalization paths and transversal changes were measured according to the distance of the pterygoid vertical as well as on the virtualized 3D plaster model.
RESULTS: Distalization of the second premolar (P2; T1 - T2) was 2.51 mm (±1.81 mm; P < .001) combined with a distal tipping of 6.50° (±5.09°; P < .001), whereas for M1 a distalization of 3.49 mm (±1.10 mm) occurred with negligible tipping (0.73° ± 5.04°). No significant differences (T1 - T2) on sagittal and vertical skeletal variables were found within or between G1+2. In contrast, a significant increase in N-Sp' in G2 and in Sp'-Gn in G1+2 with consecutive Hasund index reduction was shown. Comparing T1 and T2, the device had an effect on the transversal development.
CONCLUSION: The Beneslider distalization appliance causes an effective distalization of M1+2, with slight second premolar tipping. No modification of skeletal parameters was recorded, but a relevant effect on Hasund index and the transverse was found.