American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics · 2008
Sagittal mandibular changes with overbite correction in subjects with different mandibular growth directions: late mixed-dentition treatment effects.
Контролируемое клиническое исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка 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.
Woods Michael G
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: This study involved the assessment of pretreatment and posttreatment lateral cephalograms from late mixed-dentition patients with Class II Division 1 and Division 2 malocclusions with mild mandibular crowding. All were selected before treatment began.
METHODS: Combined growth and treatment effects were compared with changes in untreated subjects. The study was designed specifically to determine whether anteroposterior mandibular dentoalveolar and skeletal changes associated with reduction of deep incisal overbites, by using a particular late mixed-dentition treatment approach, are influenced by the direction of mandibular growth during treatment.
RESULTS: In mesofacial and brachyfacial subjects, significantly greater forward movements were found at Point B after deep overbite correction than in dolichofacial subjects. This apparently enhanced effect compared with the untreated controls was not seen at pogonion.
CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians should expect considerably greater forward movement of the mandibular dentoalveolus with normal mandibular growth after incisal bite opening in mesofacial and brachyfacial patients. As a consequence, less maxillary retraction might be necessary in growing mesofacial and brachyfacial Class II Division 1 and Division 2 patients than in dolichofacial patients. On the other hand, one should not expect enhancement of basal sagittal mandibular growth, regardless of the underlying vertical facial pattern.
METHODS: Combined growth and treatment effects were compared with changes in untreated subjects. The study was designed specifically to determine whether anteroposterior mandibular dentoalveolar and skeletal changes associated with reduction of deep incisal overbites, by using a particular late mixed-dentition treatment approach, are influenced by the direction of mandibular growth during treatment.
RESULTS: In mesofacial and brachyfacial subjects, significantly greater forward movements were found at Point B after deep overbite correction than in dolichofacial subjects. This apparently enhanced effect compared with the untreated controls was not seen at pogonion.
CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians should expect considerably greater forward movement of the mandibular dentoalveolus with normal mandibular growth after incisal bite opening in mesofacial and brachyfacial patients. As a consequence, less maxillary retraction might be necessary in growing mesofacial and brachyfacial Class II Division 1 and Division 2 patients than in dolichofacial patients. On the other hand, one should not expect enhancement of basal sagittal mandibular growth, regardless of the underlying vertical facial pattern.