You are here

Home » Content

Çekimli ve çekimsiz sabit ortodontik tedavi sonrasında anterior alveoler yapıların karşılaştırılması

A comparıson of anterior alveolar structures after extraction and nonextraction fixed orthodontic treatment

Journal Name:

  • Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Enstitüsü Dergisi

Publication Year:

  • 2011

Key Words:

Keywords (Original Language):

Author NameUniversity of AuthorFaculty of Author
Abstract (2. Language): 
Objective: The aim of this study is to evaluate the thicknesses of the upper and lower alveolar regions after extraction and nonextraction fixed treatment. Method: For this purpose, cephalometric films of 61 patients treated with four premolar extraction (n=31) and nonextraction (n=30) were evaluated. Palatal and labial alveolar thicknesses of the incisor teeth were measured at the level of the apical and coronal third of the roots. The differences between the groups were assessed by Mann-Whitney tests or student‟s t test and intragroup differences were calculated by Wilcoxon signed rank test or paired t test considering whether normal or abnormal distributed data. palatal side of the alveolar bone thickness in both groups. The alveolar bone palatal to the upper incisors were decreased, while the lingual side of the lower incisors did not change in nonextraction group. Results: The bone thickness labial to the upper anterior incisors did not change while the palatal side of the incisors were decreased significantly at the coronal and apical levels after both treatment procedures. Maxillary bone thickness decreased significantly in only nonextraction group. The alveolar bone thickness lingual to the lower incisor teeth decreased significantly at the coronal and apical levels in extraction group, while lingual bone decreased at the apical level in nonextraction group. The alveolar bone thickness labial to the lower incisors did not change in both extraction and nonextraction groups. B-B' width which is the narrowest region of the symphysis region decreased in only extraction group. Discussion: All anterior alveolar thicknesses decreased or remained stable after extraction and nonextraction treatment. Similar changes were observed in especially
Bookmark/Search this post with
Abstract (Original Language): 
Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı dört premolar çekimli ve çekimsiz olarak tedavi edilmiş vakalarda alt ve üst anterior alveoler bölge kalınlıklarını değerlendirmektir. Yöntem: Bu amaçla dört premolar çekimli olarak (n=31) ve çekimsiz olarak tedavi edilmiş (n=30) 61 hastanın sefalometrik filmleri değerlendirilmiştir. Keser dişlerin köklerinin palatal ve labial alveoler kalınlıkları koronal ve apikal üçte birlik kısım hizasından ölçüldü. Verilerin normal dağılım gösterip göstermemesine göre gruplar arası farklılıklar Mann-Whitney veya bağımsız t testi ile, grup içi farklılıklar da Wilcoxon işaret testi veya eşleştirilmiş t testi ile değerlendirildi.Sonuçlar: Her iki tedaviden sonra da üst keserlerin labial tarafındaki kemik kalınlığı değişmezken, palatal taraftaki kalınlık hem koronal hem de apikal seviyede önemli ölçüde azalma göstermiştir. Maksiller kemik kalınlığı sadece çekimsiz grupta önemli bir azalma göstermiştir. Alt keserlerin lingual tarafındaki alveoler kemik kalınlığı çekimli grupta koronal ve apikal seviyelerde azalırken, çekimsiz grupta sadece lingual tarafta kök seviyesinde önemli ölçüde azalmıştır. Alt keserlerin labial tarafındaki kemik kalınlığı hem çekimli hem de çekimsiz grupta değişmemiştir. Simfiz bölgesinin en dar yeri olan B-B' genişliği sadece çekimli grupta azalmıştır. Tartışma: Çekimli ve çekimsiz tedaviler sonrasında tüm anterior alveoler kalınlıklar azalmıştır veya değişmemiştir. Her iki grupta da özellikle palatinal tarafta benzer değişiklikler görülmüştür. Çekimsiz grupta üst keserlerin palatinal tarafındaki alveoler kemik azalırken, alt keserlerin lingual tarafındaki kemik değişmemiştir.
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
PDF icon arastirmax-cekimli-cekimsiz-sabit-ortodontik-tedavi-sonrasinda-anterior-alveoler-yapilarin-karsilastirilmasi.pdf
  • 1
25-35
  • Turkish

REFERENCES

References: 

1. Bishara SE, Cummins DM, Jakobsen JR. The morphologic basis for the extraction decision in Class II, Division 1 malocclusions: a comparative study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1995;107:129–135.
2. Barrer HG, Buchin ID, Fogel MS et al. Borderline extraction cases: Panel discussion, part 5. J Clin Orthod 1971; 5: 609-26.
3. Vardimon AD, Oren E, Ben-Bassat Y. Cortical bone remodeling/tooth movement ratio during maxillay incisor retraction with tip versus torque movements. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1998; 114:520-9.
4. Handelman CS. The anterior alveolus: It‟s importance in limiting orthodontic treatment and its influence on
the occurance of iatrogenic sequale. Angle Orthod 1996; 66: 95-109
5. Yamada C, Kitai N, Kakimoto N et al. Spatial relationship between the mandibular central incisor and associated alveolar bone in adults with mandibular prognathism. Angle Orthod 2007; 77: 766-772
6. Esenlik E, Alakuş Sabuncuoğlu F, Gulşen A. Şiddetli Sınıf Iıı Ve Sınıf I Maloklüzyonlu Vakalarda Alveoler Yapıların Ve Simfiz Bölgesinin Değerlendirilmesi. SDÜ Diş Hek Fak Der 2010; 2(1):35-44.
7. Sarıkaya S, Haydar B, Ciğer S, Ariyürek M. Changes in alveoler bone thickness due to retraction of anterior teeth. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2002; 120:15-26.
8. Wehrbein H, Bauer W, Diedrich P. Mandibuler incisors, alveolar bone, and symphysis after orthodontic treatment: a retrospective study. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1996; 110: 239.
9. Ten Hoeve A, Mulie RM. The effect of antero-postero incisor repositioning on the palatal cortex as studied with laminagraphy. J Clin Orthod 1976; 10: 804-822.
10.Paquette DE, Beattie JR, Johnston LE Jr. A long-term comparison of nonextraction and premolar extraction edgewise therapy in„„borderline‟‟ Class II patients. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop.1992;102:1–14.
11. Williams R, Hosila FJ. The effect of different extraction sites upon incisor retraction. Am J Orthod. 1976;69: 388–410
12. Batenhorst K, Bowers GM, Williams IE. Tissue changes resulting from facial tipping and extrusion in monkeys. J Periodontol 1974; 46: 660-88.
13. Steiner GG, Pearson JK, Ainamo J. Changes of marginal periodontium as a result of labial tooth movement in monkeys. J Periodontol 1981; 52: 314-320.
14. Meickle MC. The dentomaxillary complex and overjet correction in Class II Division I malocclusion: objectives of skeletal and alveolar remodelling. Am J Orthod 1980; 77: 184-97.
15. Edwards JG. A study of the anterior portion of the palate as it relates to orthodontic therapy. Am J Orthod 1976; 69: 249-273.
16. Ten Hoeve A, Mulie RM. The effect of anteroposterior incisor repositioning on the palatal cortex as studied with laminography. J Clin Orthod 1976; 10:804-22.
17. Liou EJW, Huang CS. Rapid canine retraction through distraction of the periodontal ligament. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1998;114:372-81.
18. Engelking G, Zachrisson BU. Effects of incisor repositioning on monkey periodontium after expansion through the cortical plate. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1982;82:23-32.
19. Gündüz E, Rodriguez-Torres C, Gahleitner A, Heissenberger G, Bantleon HP. Bone regeneration by bodily tooth movement: dental computed tomography examination of a patient. Am J Orthod 2004; 125: 100-6.
20. Goldin B. Labial root torque: effect on the maxilla and incisor root apex. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1989 Mar;95(3):208-19.
21. Diedrich P. Problems and risks in the movement of the mandibular anterior teeth. Fortschr Kieferorthop. 1995 May;56(3):148-56.
22. Wainwright WM. Faciolingual tooth movement: it‟s influence on the rooth and cortical plate. Am J Orthod 1970; 64:278-302.
23. Mills, J. R. E.: The long-term results of the proclination of lower incisors, Br. Dent. J. 120: 355-363, 1966.

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com