RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: The objective of this study was to compare the long-term cephalometric stability after successful therapy of nonextraction Class II malocclusion with elastics and with headgear. METHODS: The sample comprised 43 patients with Class II malocclusion and was divided into 2 groups. The elastic group (EG) consisted of 20 patients treated with fixed appliances associated with Class II elastics, and the headgear group (HG) consisted of 23 patients treated with fixed appliances and extraoral headgear. Pretreatment, posttreatment, and long-term posttreatment lateral radiographs were evaluated; t tests were used to compare the long-term posttreatment changes between the groups. RESULTS: The groups were matched regarding initial age, time of long-term posttreatment evaluation, initial malocclusion severity, quality of treatment result, and all pretreatment cephalometric variables. Intergroup comparisons of long-term posttreatment changes showed that the HG group presented significantly greater mandibular protrusion, occlusal plane angle decrease, and maxillary molar mesialization. However, long-term posttreatment stability was similar in overjet, overbite, and molar relationships. CONCLUSIONS: Nonextraction Class II malocclusion treatment with elastics or extraoral headgear have similar long-term posttreatment stability.
Asunto(s)
Maloclusión Clase II de Angle , Maloclusión , Sobremordida , Humanos , Maloclusión Clase II de Angle/diagnóstico por imagen , Maloclusión Clase II de Angle/terapia , Sobremordida/terapia , Resultado del Tratamiento , Aparatos Ortodóncicos Fijos , Cefalometría , Aparatos de Tracción ExtraoralRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: In orthodontic treatment, indication of dental extractions is very common and frequently used in adult patients. This situation is a recurrent concern among orthodontists, since age and extraction treatment are factors that may increase periodontal support loss. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate adolescent and adult patients, orthodontically treated with maxillary premolar extractions, and compare both groups regarding the changes in alveolar bone height loss, retrospectively. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty-five patients were selected from the files of an Orthodontic Department and divided into 2 groups. The adolescent group comprised 30 patients with a mean age of 12.7 years (SD=1.4) and the adult group comprised 25 patients with a mean age of 25.0 years (SD=1.8). Periapical radiographs obtained at pre-treatment (T1) and posttreatment (T2) were evaluated. Wilcoxon tests were used to analyse intragroup treatment changes. Mann-Whitney tests were used to compare intergroup and inter-sex initial and final statuses and treatment changes. P<0.05 is considered to be statistically significant. RESULTS: Statistically significant increases in alveolar bone height loss of the maxillary central incisors were observed on the right and left sides of the adolescent (P=0.001 and P=0.002, respectively) and of the adult (P=0.001 and P<0.001, respectively) groups, during treatment. There were no significant differences in alveolar bone height between initial and final state, in treatment effects between adolescent and adult patients, in extraction patterns, and between males and females. CONCLUSIONS: Significant increase in alveolar bone height loss was found in both adult and adolescent patients orthodontically treated with maxillary premolar extractions. However, no significant differences were found regarding alveolar bone height changes after extraction orthodontic treatment between adolescent and adult patients.