scholarly journals Unusual Extraction Treatment in Class II division 1 Using C-Orthodontic Mini-Implants

2007 ◽  
Vol 77 (1) ◽  
pp. 155-166 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kyu-Rhim Chung ◽  
Jae-Hee Cho ◽  
Seong-Hun Kim ◽  
Yoon-Ah Kook ◽  
Mauro Cozzani
Keyword(s):  
Treatment Plan ◽  
Class Ii ◽  
Orthodontic Appliances ◽  
Posterior Teeth ◽  
Anterior Crowding ◽  
Mini Implants ◽  
Anterior Teeth ◽  
Mandibular Molar ◽  
Division 1 ◽  
Class Ii Division 1

Abstract This paper describes the treatment of a female patient, aged 23 years and 5 months, with a Class II division 1 malocclusion, who showed severe anterior protrusion and lower anterior crowding. Specially-designed orthodontic mini-implants were placed bilaterally in the interdental space between both the upper and the lower posterior teeth. Both lower first molars showed severe apical lesions. Therefore, the treatment plan consisted of extraction of both upper first premolars and lower first molars, en masse retraction of the upper six anterior teeth, lower anterior alignment, and protraction of all the lower molars. C-implants® were used as substitutes for maxillary posterior anchorage teeth during anterior retraction and as hooks for mandibular molar protraction. The correct overbite and overjet were obtained by intruding and retracting the upper six anterior teeth into their proper positions. The dentition was detailed using conventional orthodontic appliances. The upper C-implants contributed to an improvement in facial balance, and the lower C-implants made it possible to protract the lower second and third molars with less effect on the axis of the lower anterior teeth. The active treatment period was 29 months and the patient's teeth continued to be stable 11 months after debonding.

scholarly journals Perawatan Ortodontik Alat Lepasan Kombinasi Semi-Cekat pada Kehilangan Gigi 46

2016 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 20
Author(s):  
Maharetta Ditaprilia ◽  
Wayan Ardhana ◽  
Christnawati Christnawati
Keyword(s):  
Class Ii ◽  
Orthodontic Appliances ◽  
Angle Class Ii ◽  
Anterior Teeth ◽  
Angle Class ◽  
Fixed Orthodontic Appliances ◽  
Division 1 ◽  
Removable Appliances ◽  
Lower Arch ◽  
Class Ii Division 1

Salah satu pertimbangan dalam menentukan alat ortodontik yang akan digunakan adalah biaya. Alat ortodontik lepasan dipilih karena memerlukan biaya yang lebih rendah dibanding dengan alat ortodontik cekat. Perawatan ortodontik dengan alat lepasan sulit dilakukan jika disertai dengan pencabutan satu atau beberapa gigi posterior. Pasien perempuan usia 23 tahun, mengeluhkan gigi rahang atas maju dan gigi rahang bawah berjejal. Pemeriksaan objektif menunjukkan protrusif rahang atas, crowding rahang bawah, palatal bite, disertai kehilangan gigi 46. Maloklusi Angle Kelas II divisi 1 tipe dentoskeletal, hubungan skeletal klas II, protrusif bimaksilar, bidental protrusif, overjet 7,2 mm, crowding, palatal bite, dan kebiasaan bernafas melalui mulut. Perawatan menggunakan kombinasi alat semi-cekat pada rahang bawah dan alat lepasan pada rahang atas. Alat semi-cekat digunakan untuk space clossing bekas pencabutan gigi 46. Terjadi space closing bekas pencabutan gigi 46 setelah 6 bulan perawatan. Overjet berkurang menjadi 4 mm dan overbite 2,7 mm setelah 1 tahun perawatan. Kombinasi alat semi-cekat pada rahang bawah dan alat ortodontik lepasan pada rahang atas efektif untuk koreksi maloklusi Angle Klas II divisi 1 dengan kehilangan gigi 46 pada pasien ini. ABSTRACT: Orthodontic Treatment Using Semi-Fixed Appliances with Partial Edentulous 46. Cost is one of the considerations in determining the use of orthodontic appliances. Removable orthodontic appliance is chosen because it is less costly than fixed orthodontic appliances. It is difficult to use removable orthodontic appliances to treat a missing one or more posterior teeth case. A 23 year old female patient had a chief complaint of crowding in lower anterior teeth and forwardly placed upper anterior teeth. Her objective examination shows protrution of upper teeth, crowding in the lower arch, palatal bite, and partial edentulous of 46 tooth. It was Angle Class II division 1 dentoskeletal malocclusion, skeletal class II, bimaxillary protrusion, bidental protrusion, overjet 7,2 mm, crowding, palatal bite, and mouth-breathing habit. The treatment used a combination of semi-fixed orthodontic appliances in the lower arch and removable appliances in the upper arch. The semi-fixed orthodontic appliances were used on space closing of partial edentulous 46. The partial edentulous 46 was closed after 6 months of treatment. The overjet was reduced to 4 mm and overbite 2,7 mm after one year of treatment. The combination of semi-fixed orthodontic appliances in the lower arch and removable appliances in the upper arch generate a good result to correct Angle Class II division 1 malocclusion with partial edentulous 46.

scholarly journals Dentoskeletal and Soft Tissue Effects of Mini-Implants in Class II division 1 Patients

2009 ◽  
Vol 79 (2) ◽  
pp. 240-247 ◽  
Author(s):  
Madhur Upadhyay ◽  
Sumit Yadav ◽  
K. Nagaraj ◽  
Ravindra Nanda
Keyword(s):  
Soft Tissue ◽  
Treatment Effects ◽  
Class Ii ◽  
Complete Space ◽  
Mini Implants ◽  
Anterior Teeth ◽  
Lateral Cephalograms ◽  
Division 1 ◽  
Soft Tissue Changes ◽  
Class Ii Division 1

Abstract Objective: To examine the skeletal, dental, and soft tissue treatment effects of retraction of maxillary anterior teeth with mini-implant anchorage in nongrowing Class II division 1 female patients. Materials and Methods: Twenty-three patients (overjet ≥7 mm) were selected on the basis of predefined selection criteria. Treatment mechanics consisted of retraction of anterior teeth by placing mini-implants in the interdental bone between the roots of the maxillary first molar and second premolar. A force of 150 g was applied, bilaterally. Treatment effects were analyzed by taking lateral cephalograms and study casts at T1 (before initiation of retraction) and at T2 (after complete space closure). Results: The upper anterior teeth showed significant retraction (5.18 ± 2.74 mm) and intrusion (1.32 ± 1.08 mm). The upper first molar also showed some distal movement and intrusion, but this was not significant (P > .05). The upper and lower lips were retracted by 2.41 mm and 2.73 mm, respectively, and the convexity angle reduced by over 2° (P < .001). Conclusion: Mini-implants provided absolute anchorage to bring about significant dental and soft tissue changes in moderate to severe Class II division 1 patients and can be considered as possible alternatives to orthognathic surgery in select cases. (Angle Orthod. 2009:79; )

scholarly journals Agenesis of maxillary lateral incisor in an Angle Class II, Division 1 malocclusion patient

2015 ◽  
Vol 20 (5) ◽  
pp. 108-117
Author(s):  
Guilherme Thiesen
Keyword(s):  
Class Ii ◽  
Lateral Incisor ◽  
Occlusal Plane ◽  
Angle Class Ii ◽  
Anterior Teeth ◽  
Angle Class ◽  
Division 1 ◽  
Maxillary Lateral Incisor ◽  
Dentofacial Orthopedics ◽  
Class Ii Division 1

The present case report describes the orthodontic treatment of a patient with agenesis of maxillary left lateral incisor and Angle Class II, Division 1 malocclusion. The patient also presented with maxillary midline deviation and inclination of the occlusal plane in the anterior region. Treatment objectives were: correction of sagittal relationship between the maxilla and the mandible; correction of midline deviation, so as to cause maxillary and mandibular midlines to coincide; correction of overbite and leveling of the occlusal plane, so as to create ideal conditions for esthetic rehabilitation of anterior teeth. This case was presented to the Brazilian Board of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics (BBO) as a requirement for the title of certified by the BBO.

scholarly journals Class II Division 1 malocclusion treatment using TADs: Case report

2020 ◽  
Vol 67 (3) ◽  
pp. 159-164
Author(s):  
Tina Pajevic ◽  
Jovana Juloski ◽  
Marija Zivkovic
Keyword(s):  
Case Report ◽  
Orthodontic Treatment ◽  
Class Ii ◽  
Dental Arch ◽  
Class Ii Malocclusion ◽  
Posterior Teeth ◽  
Temporary Anchorage Devices ◽  
Division 1 ◽  
Incisor Retraction ◽  
Class Ii Division 1

Introduction. Orthodontic treatment of Class II Division 1 (II/1) malocclusions in adults can be challenging since skeletal effects are limited. Possible treatment options are orthodontic camouflage or orthognatic surgery, in severe cases. The aim of this paper was to present a successful management of Class II malocclusion in an adult patient using temporary anchorage devices (TADs). Case report. After detailed clinical examination, study models and cephalometric analysis, a 26 years old patient was diagnosed with Class II malocclusion, an overjet of 12 mm, congenitally missing tooth 41 and midline shifted to the right in upper dental arch. In prior orthodontic treatment, patient had upper premolars extracted. Posterior teeth in upper left quadrant were shifted mesially. The camouflage treatment was considered, using temporary anchorage devices (TADs) to distalize posterior teeth on the left side, and gain space for incisor retraction and midline correction in upper dental arch. Results. Using TADs as additional anchorage in anterior region and coil spring for molar distalization, the space was made for tooth 23, midline correction and incisor retraction. After 40 months, a satisfactory result was achieved, overjet and midline correction, class I canines occlusion and class II molar occlusion. Conclusion. Class II/1 malocclusion in adults can be successfully treated using TADs. The success depends on the severity of malocclusion and patient cooperation.

scholarly journals Comparison of arch width, alveolar width and buccolingual inclination of teeth between Class II division 1 malocclusion and Class I occlusion

2012 ◽  
Vol 83 (2) ◽  
pp. 246-252 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rui Shu ◽  
Xianglong Han ◽  
Yating Wang ◽  
Hui Xu ◽  
Dongqing Ai ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Class Ii ◽  
Class I ◽  
Posterior Teeth ◽  
Mandibular Arch ◽  
Arch Width ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Division 1 ◽  
Maxillary Premolars ◽  
Mandibular Posterior Teeth ◽  
Class Ii Division 1

ABSTRACT Objective: To compare the arch width, alveolar width, and buccolingual inclination of maxillary and mandibular posterior teeth between Class II division 1 malocclusion and Class I occlusion. Materials and Methods: Forty-five subjects with Class I occlusion and 45 subjects with Class II division 1 malocclusion were selected to measure the maxillary and mandibular arch width and alveolar width of premolars and first molars with digital caliper. Buccolingual inclination of maxillary and mandibular premolars and first molars were measured with a modified universal bevel protractor. Results: All of the posterior teeth in both groups were lingually tilted. The maxillary premolars and first molars were significantly more lingually tilted (P < .05) in Class II division 1 malocclusion than in Class I occlusion. Mandibular first premolars were significantly less lingually tilted in Class II division 1 malocclusion than in Class I occlusion. No significant difference of buccolingual inclination was found in mandibular second premolars and first molars between the two groups. No significant difference in maxillary and mandibular arch width and alveolar width was found between the two groups. Conclusions: Buccolingual inclination rather than arch width and alveolar width plays an important role in transverse discrepancy of Class II division 1 malocclusion.

scholarly journals Facial esthetic outcome of functional followed by fixed orthodontic treatment of class II division 1 patients

2019 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mary-Eleni Zouloumi ◽  
Kleopatra Tsiouli ◽  
Simeon Psomiadis ◽  
Olga-Elpis Kolokitha ◽  
Nikolaos Topouzelis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Class Ii ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Orthodontic Appliances ◽  
Facial Appearance ◽  
Twin Block ◽  
Fixed Orthodontic Appliances ◽  
Division 1 ◽  
Wilks Lambda ◽  
Facial Changes ◽  
Class Ii Division 1

Abstract Objectives To assess the perceived facial changes in class II division 1, convex profile patients treated with functional followed by fixed orthodontic appliances. Subjects and methods The study sample consisted of 36 pairs of pre- and post-treatment photographs (frontal and profile, at rest) of 12 patients treated with activator, 12 with twin-block, and 12 controls with normal profiles, treated without functional appliances. All photographs were presented in pairs to 10 orthodontists, 10 patients, 10 parents, and 10 laypersons. Visual analog scale (VAS) ratings of changes in facial appearance were assessed. Results The patient groups were similar in sex distributions, age, and treatment duration. The different rater groups showed strong to excellent agreement. There were no significant differences among treatment groups (F = 0.91; P = 0.526; Wilks lambda = 0.93), raters (F = 1.68; P = 0.054; Wilks lambda = 0.83), and when testing the combined effect of treatment and rater on the results (F = 0.72; P = 0.866; Wilks lambda = 0.85). The raters detected slightly more positive changes in the activator and twin-block groups, compared to the control group, regarding the lower face and the lips, but these findings did not reach significance. Furthermore, their magnitude hardly exceeded 1/20th of the total VAS length. Limitations Retrospective study design. Conclusions The perceived facial changes of convex profile patients treated with functional, followed by fixed orthodontic appliances, did not differ from those observed in normal profile patients, when full-face frontal and profile photos were simultaneously assessed. Consequently, professionals should be skeptical regarding the improvement of a patient’s facial appearance when this treatment option is used.

scholarly journals TADs assisted Camouflage Orthodontic Treatment of Class II Division 1 Malocclusion in a Non Growing Patient: A case report

2018 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 55-59
Author(s):  
Ankita Gupta ◽  
Trilok Shrivastava
Keyword(s):  
Case Report ◽  
Class Ii ◽  
Maxillary Incisor ◽  
Mandibular Incisor ◽  
Anterior Crowding ◽  
Skeletal Class ◽  
Curve Of Spee ◽  
Skeletal Class Ii ◽  
Division 1 ◽  
Class Ii Division 1

Class II, Division I malocclusion has been described as the most frequent treatment problem in orthodontic practice. Aim & objectives of the present case report was to evaluate the management of skeletal Class II division 1 malocclusion in non growing patient with extraction of upper first premolars. Clinical and cephalometric evaluation revealed skeletal Class II with Angles Class II division 1 malocclusion with mild mandibular anterior crowding and increased overjet, severe maxillary incisor proclination, mild mandibular crowding, exaggerated curve of spee, convex profile, incompetent lips, increased overjet and overbite. Maxillary first premolars were extracted followed by en-masse retraction of anteriors with the help of temporary anchorage devices (TADs) to avoid anchorage loss. Mandibular incisor was extracted to correct curve of spee. Following treatment marked improvement in patient’s smile, facial profile and lip competence were achieved and there was a remarkable increase in the patient’s confidence and quality of life.

scholarly journals Analysis of Maxillary Bone Thickness at Incisor Area in Class II Division 1 Malocclusion

2011 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 42-46
Author(s):  
Manju Bajracharya
Keyword(s):  
Treatment Plan ◽  
Class Ii ◽  
High Angle ◽  
Bone Thickness ◽  
Linear Measurements ◽  
Jaw Bone ◽  
Division 1 ◽  
Facial Types ◽  
Average Angle ◽  
Class Ii Division 1

Objectives: To determine and analyze the maxillary incisal jaw bone thickness among different vertical skeletal facial types of Class II Division 1 malocclusion. Materials and method: The samples (n=121) between 12-14 yrs of age were divided into three groups (low angle, average angle, high angle) based on their SN-MP angle. Linear measurements were processed and analyzed statistically. The characteristics of abnormal incisor jaw bone thickness at upper and lower incisors among three vertical facial skeletal types were studied in detail. Results: At the upper and lower central incisors low angle individuals presented greater dentoalveolar, basal bone thickness than high and average angle individuals. The distance from the root apex of upper and lower central incisors were far away from the lingual cortex in low angle than high angle individuals. Conclusion: Among different vertical facial types with Class II Division 1 malocclusion in early permanent dentition may accord to establish discriminate values as a sample to set up the cephalometric standard for the appropriate diagnosis to provide better treatment plan for the clinicians.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document