Extraction Treatment Using Unilateral Molar Distalization for Lip Protrusion Patient with Asymmetric Molar Relationship

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 140-149
Author(s):  
Ju-Man Kang ◽  
Moon-Bee Oh
Keyword(s):  
Molar Distalization ◽  
Extraction Treatment

scholarly journals MK Versatile spring: A Novel approach for intraoral maxillary molar distalization

2015 ◽  
Vol 5 ◽  
pp. 289-293
Author(s):  
Manish Kumar Gupta ◽  
Sumit Gandhi ◽  
Javed Sodawala ◽  
Anita Ganta
Keyword(s):  
Case Reports ◽  
Class Ii ◽  
The Other ◽  
Molar Distalization ◽  
Clinical Innovation ◽  
Novel Approach ◽  
Maxillary Molar ◽  
Extraction Treatment

Molar distalisation is method of choice for gaining space in mild crowding cases as well as non-extraction treatment of patients having Class II Div 1 malocclusion. Through this paper we present a clinical innovation “MK” versatile spring for efficient tooth distalisation and mesialiation by inter-changing the positon of the helices. “MK” spring is made by 0.017˝ × 0.025˝ TMA wire in “M” configuration. It consists of 2 helices, one at the central arm and the other at the arm close to the tooth being mesialized or distalized. The helices are 2 mm in diameter and the length of the arm is 6 mm. The article presents 2 case reports where the effictiveness and efficiency of “MK” spring have been highlighted.

Extraction or non-extraction treatment for Class II division 2 malocclusion?

2018 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 88-89
Author(s):  
Benjamin J Goldstein ◽  
Analia Veitz-Keenan
Keyword(s):  
Class Ii ◽  
Division 2 ◽  
Extraction Treatment

New design for unilateral upper molar distalization with bone anchorage system

2019 ◽  
pp. 1-4
Keyword(s):  
Patient Compliance ◽  
Tooth Movement ◽  
Molar Distalization ◽  
Anchorage System ◽  
Conventional Methods ◽  
Upper Molar ◽  
Bone Anchorage

Molar distalization is considered as a good approach for creating space. Conventional methods were depended on patient compliance but with se of mini screw, tooth movement are done more rapidly, easily and non-compliance. Our design is useful for unilateral upper molar distalization by modified power arm that is connected to mini screw by elastic chain.

scholarly journals Comparison of one versus two maxillary molars distalization with iPanda: a finite element analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kamontip Sujaritwanid ◽  
Boonsiva Suzuki ◽  
Eduardo Yugo Suzuki
Keyword(s):  
Finite Element ◽  
Stress Distribution ◽  
Alveolar Bone ◽  
Vertical Direction ◽  
Minimal Amount ◽  
Element Analysis ◽  
Molar Distalization ◽  
Second Molar ◽  
Maxillary Molars ◽  
Displacement Patterns

Abstract Background The purpose of this study was to compare the stress distribution and displacement patterns of the one versus two maxillary molars distalization with iPanda and to evaluate the biomechanical effect of distalization on the iPanda using the finite element method. Methods The finite element models of a maxillary arch with complete dentition, periodontal ligament, palatal and alveolar bone, and an iPanda connected to a pair of midpalatal miniscrews were created. Two models were created to simulate maxillary molar distalization. In the first model, the iPanda was connected to the second molar to simulate a single molar distalization. In the second model, the iPanda was connected to the first molar to simulate “en-masse” first and second molar distalization. A varying force from 50 to 200 g was applied. The stress distribution and displacement patterns were analyzed. Results For one molar, the stress was concentrated at the furcation and along the distal surface in all roots with a large amount of distalization and distobuccal crown tipping. For two molars, the stress in the first molar was 10 times higher than in the second molar with a great tendency for buccal tipping and a minimal amount of distalization. Moreover, the stress concentration on the distal miniscrew was six times higher than in the mesial miniscrew with an extrusive and intrusive vector, respectively. Conclusions Individual molar distalization provides the most effective stress distribution and displacement patterns with reduced force levels. In contrast, the en-masse distalization of two molars results in increased force levels with undesirable effects in the transverse and vertical direction.

scholarly journals Efficiency of the skeletonized Pendulum K appliance for non-compliance maxillary molar distalization

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gero Stefan Michael Kinzinger ◽  
Jan Hourfar ◽  
Jörg Alexander Lisson
Keyword(s):  
Side Effects ◽  
Lower Percentage ◽  
Molar Distalization ◽  
Maxillary Molars ◽  
Maxillary Molar ◽  
Force Moment ◽  
Maxillary Premolars ◽  
Anchorage Loss ◽  
Upper Molar

Abstract Purpose Conventional anchorage with exclusively intraorally anchored appliances for non-compliance molar distalization combines a palatal acrylic button with periodontal anchorage. This type of anchorage is critically discussed because of the temporary hygienic impairment of the palate and the uncertain anchoring quality of the button. A purely dentally/periodontally anchored Pendulum K appliance was developed, which is exclusively anchored via four occlusal rests. The aims of this pilot study were to examine the suitability of the skeletonized Pendulum K for distalization of maxillary molars, and to investigate the quality of this alternative anchoring modality. Patients and methods In all, 10 patients received skeletonized Pendulum K appliances attached to all maxillary premolars for bilateral molar distalization. Supporting anchorage through an acrylic button adjacent to the anterior palate was not used. The pendulum springs were initially activated on both sides with a distalization force of 220 cN each and provided with uprighting and toe-in bends. The specific force/moment system was regularly reactivated intraorally by adjustment of the distal screw. Results The study demonstrates the suitability of the skeletonized Pendulum K appliance for the distalization of maxillary molars (3.28 ± 0.73 mm). Side effects on the molars were slight distal tipping (3.50 ± 2.51°/PP, 3.00 ± 1.41°/SN) and mesial inward rotation (average 2.75 ± 7.50° and 4.50 ± 12.77°). Significant anchorage loss occurred in the form of mesialization of the incisors by 1.40 ± 0.82 mm and of the first premolars by 2.28 ± 0.85 mm. Conclusion The skeletonized Pendulum K appliance allows compliance-free upper molar distalization. Exclusively dental/periodontal anchorage resulted in a lower percentage of molar distalization compared to a conventional anchoring preparation of the Pendulum K with a palatal acrylic button. Anchorage loss had a comparatively stronger effect on the anchoring premolars but less on the incisors. Typical side effects on the molars such as distal tipping and mesial inward rotation were remarkably low.

scholarly journals Influence of unilateral maxillary first molar extraction treatment on second and third molar inclination in Class II subdivision patients

2015 ◽  
Vol 86 (1) ◽  
pp. 94-100 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christos Livas ◽  
Nikolaos Pandis ◽  
Johan Willem Booij ◽  
Demetrios J. Halazonetis ◽  
Christos Katsaros ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Private Practice ◽  
Orthodontic Treatment ◽  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Third Molar ◽  
Class Ii ◽  
Second Molar ◽  
Inclination Angles ◽  
And Gender ◽  
Extraction Treatment ◽  
Over Time

ABSTRACT Objective:  To assess the maxillary second molar (M2) and third molar (M3) inclination following orthodontic treatment of Class II subdivision malocclusion with unilateral maxillary first molar (M1) extraction. Materials and Methods:  Panoramic radiographs of 21 Class II subdivision adolescents (eight boys, 13 girls; mean age, 12.8 years; standard deviation, 1.7 years) before treatment, after treatment with extraction of one maxillary first molar and Begg appliances and after at least 1.8 years in retention were retrospectively collected from a private practice. M2 and M3 inclination angles (M2/ITP, M2/IOP, M3/ITP, M3/IOP), constructed by intertuberosity (ITP) and interorbital planes (IOP), were calculated for the extracted and nonextracted segments. Random effects regression analysis was performed to evaluate the effect on the molar angulation of extraction, time, and gender after adjusting for baseline measurements. Results:  Time and extraction status were significant predictors for M2 angulation. M2/ITP and M2/IOP decreased by 4.04 (95% confidence interval [CI]: −6.93, 1.16; P  =  .001) and 3.67 (95% CI: −6.76, −0.58; P  =  .020) in the extraction group compared to the nonextraction group after adjusting for time and gender. The adjusted analysis showed that extraction was the only predictor for M3 angulation that reached statistical significance. M3 mesial inclination increased by 7.38° (95% CI: −11.2, −3.54; P < .001) and 7.33° (95% CI: −11.48, −3.19; P  =  .001). Conclusions:  M2 and M3 uprighting significantly improved in the extraction side after orthodontic treatment with unilateral maxillary M1 extraction. There was a significant increase in mesial tipping of maxillary second molar crowns over time.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document