scholarly journals Comparison of intercanine width in between Angle class II division 1 and division 2 malocclusions

2016 ◽  
Vol 28 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Bebby Putri ◽  
Isnaniyah Malik ◽  
N R Yuliawati Zenab
Keyword(s):  
Orthodontic Treatment ◽  
Class Ii ◽  
Dental Arch ◽  
Arch Width ◽  
Angle Class Ii ◽  
Angle Class ◽  
Division 1 ◽  
Dental Arch Width ◽  
Division 2 ◽  
Class Ii Division 1

Introduction: Dental arch width measurement is needed to determine diagnoses and orthodontic treatment planning of Angle Class II Division 1 and Class II Division 2  malocclusions that have narrow maxillary dental arch generally. Dental arch width in this study was measured by maxillary and mandibular intercanine width.  This study aimed to compare the differences of intercanine width between Angle Class II division 1 and Class II division 2 malocclusions. Methods: Descriptive comparative research with total samples of 67 study models, consisted of 34 Class II division 1 cases and 33 Class II division 2 cases. The minimum age of the samples chosen was 13 years old with no history of orthodontic treatment. A non probability consecutive sampling technique was used. Results: Study results showed the avarage maxillary and mandibular intercanine width of Class II Division 1 were 33,99 mm and 26,33 mm. Average maxillary and mandibular intercanine width of Class II Division 2 were 34,77 mm and 25,37 mm. Conclusions: T-test analysis showed no statistical significant differences in the intercanine width between Angle Class II Division 1 and Class II Division 2  malocclusions.

scholarly journals Orthodontic Treatment Combined with Miniscrew Anchorage for an Angle Class II Division 1 Case with Severe Crowding and TMDs

2020 ◽  
Vol 03 (03) ◽  
Author(s):  
Naoto Hirose ◽  
Makoto Yanoshita ◽  
Azusa Onishi ◽  
Yuka Yamauchi ◽  
Sayuri Nishiyama ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Orthodontic Treatment ◽  
Class Ii ◽  
Angle Class Ii ◽  
Angle Class ◽  
Division 1 ◽  
Class Ii Division 1

scholarly journals Interference of mouth breathing with orthodontic treatment duration in Angle Class II, Division 1

2017 ◽  
Vol 46 (3) ◽  
pp. 184-188 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jéssica Antunes RODRIGUES ◽  
Bianca Núbia SOUZA-SILVA ◽  
Sílvia Elaine Zuim de Moraes BALDRIGHI ◽  
Luiz Renato PARANHOS ◽  
Carla Patrícia Hernandez Alves Ribeiro CÉSAR
Keyword(s):  
Treatment Duration ◽  
Orthodontic Treatment ◽  
Class Ii ◽  
Mouth Breathing ◽  
Nasal Breathing ◽  
Breathing Mode ◽  
Angle Class Ii ◽  
Angle Class ◽  
Division 1 ◽  
Class Ii Division 1

Abstract Introduction Several factors can interfere with orthodontic treatment, and it is important to verify which ones may hinder its success. Objective To compare the duration of orthodontic treatment between nasal and mouth breathers with Angle Class II, Division 1 malocclusion. Material and method This is an analytical observational study which used the records of orthodontic patients cared at a higher education institution in Sao Paulo state, Brazil, between 1999 and 2009. Data from the following variables were analyzed: age, gender, breathing mode (nasal or oral breathing), and treatment duration (beginning and end). Patients were matched for age and treatment used. The ANOVA test was applied to analyze the study data at 5% significance level (p<0.05). Result The study sample consisted of 36 individuals, 16 female (10 nasal breathers and six mouth breathers) and 20 males (eight nasal breathers and 12 mouth breathers), aged nine to 15 years (mean age=13.021). As for orthodontic treatment duration, individuals in the nasal breathing group remained between 27 and 74 months (mean duration=39.61) under treatment, whereas treatment of individuals in the mouth breathing group lasted between 29 and 50 months (mean duration=36.66). No statistically significant differences were observed between the study groups. Conclusions We conclude that the variable altered breathing mode does not interfere with treatment duration.

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.

The outcome of a two-phase treatment in a patient with Angle Class II, Division 1 malocclusion and an excessive overjet

2009 ◽  
Vol 68 (2) ◽  
pp. 88-94
Author(s):  
Yoko Takigawa ◽  
Yuji Sanma ◽  
Setsuko Uematsu ◽  
Kenji Takada
Keyword(s):  
Class Ii ◽  
Two Phase ◽  
Angle Class Ii ◽  
Angle Class ◽  
Division 1 ◽  
Class Ii Division 1
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document