Comparison of Effects of Two Different Treatment Modalities on Skeletal Open-Bite

Year 2009, Volume: 36 Issue: 2 - Volume: 36 Issue: 2 , 85 - 93 , 01.05.2009

Gökmen Kurt Hatice Gökalp Özge Aktaş Özlem Sancak

https://izlik.org/JA34GA53SG

Abstract

The objective of this study to compare effectsof fixed and removable orthodontic applications onopen-bite correctionMaterial and method is consist of ten caseswith a mean age of 13.43±1.72 years and with amean ANB angle of 1.86±2.33º were comprised theFirst Group and a combination of occipital headgear and bite-block was used. Ten individuals treated by upper and lower Ni-Ti arch wires withincreased curve of spee and with anterior verticalelastics constructed the Second Group. Mean initialage was 16.88±1.96 years and ANB was -0.5±1.58º.Twenty two skeletal and eight dental measurementswere achieved on lateral cephalometric films. Intragroup differences were evaluated with Wilcoxontest and inter group differences were calculatedwtih Mann Whitney U test.Significant increase in SN-PP angle, significant decrease in vertical plane angle, significantextrusion in upper incisors and lower molars andsignificant intrusion in upper molars were observedin the First Group P

Keywords

Bite-Block , Occipital Headgear , Open-bite

İki farklı tedavi yönteminin iskeletsel açık kapanışa etkilerinin karşılaştırılması

https://izlik.org/JA34GA53SG

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı sabit ve hareketliortodontik uygulamaların açık kapanış düzeltimineetkilerini karşılaştırmaktır.Çalışma gruplarını 20 hasta oluşturmaktadır.Birinci grubu tedavi başı ortalama yaşı 13.43±1.72yıl, ANB açısı 1.86±2.33º olan 10 hasta oluşturmaktadır. Bu hastalara occipital headgear ile biteblok kombinasyonu uygulanmıştır. İkinci grubu iseartırılmış spee eğrili alt ve üst Ni-Ti tellere anteriorbölgede asılan vertikal lastikler uygulanan 10 hastaoluşturmuştur. İkinci grupta tedavi öncesi ortalamayaş 16.88±1.96 yıl, ANB -0.5±1.58º ‘dir. İki gruptameydana gelen değişiklikler tedavi başı T1 vetedavi sonunda T2 alınan lateral sefalometrikfilmlerde yapılan ölçümlerden değerlendirilmiştir.Bu amaçla 22 iskeletsel ve 8 dişsel ölçüm yapılmıştır. İki tedavi grubunda grup içi farklarWilcoxon testi ile gruplar arası farklar ise MannWhitney U testi ile karşılaştırılmıştır.Birinci grupta SN-PP açısında anlamlı artış P

Keywords

Bite-blok , Occipital Headgear , Aç›k Kapanış.

References

• Arat M, Iseri H. Orthodontic and orthopedic approach in the treatment of skeletal open bite. Eur J Orthod 1992; 14: 207-15.
• Subtelny JD, Sakuda M. Open bite: diagnosis and treatment. Am J Orthod 1964; 50: 337-58.
• Sassouni V, Nanda S. Analysis of dentofacial vertical proportions Am J Orthod 1964; 50: 801-23.
• Schudy FF. The rotation of the mandible resulting from growth: its implication in orthodontic treatment. Angle Orthod 1965; 35: 36-50.
• Bjork A. Prediction of mandibular growth rotation. Am J Orthod 1969; 55: 585-99.
• Atkinson SR. Open bite malocclusion. Am J Orthod 1966; 52: 877-86.
• Gershater MM. The proper perspective of open bite. Angle Orthod 1972; 46: 263-72.
• Mizrahi E. A review of anterior open bite. Br J Orthod 1978; 5: 21-7.
• Frankel R, Frankel C. A functional approach to treatment of skeletal open bite. Am J Orthod 1983; 54: 54-68.
• Proffit WR. Equilibrium therapy: Revisited influencing position of the teeth. Angle Orthod 1978; 48: 175-86.
• Moss ML, Salentijn LM. Differences between functional matrices in open bite and in deep overbite. Am J Orthod 1971; 60: 264-80.
• Proffit WR, Fields HW Jr, Ackerman JL, Bailey LJ, Tulloch JFC. Contemporary Orthodontics. 3rd ed. St. Louis: Mosby Inc; 2000, p: 478-523.
• Baumrind S, Korn EL, Isaacson RJ et al. Quantitative analysis of orthodontic and orthopedic effects of maxillary traction. Am J Orthod 1983; 84: 384-98.
• Ucem TT, Yüksel S. Effects of different vectors of forces applied by combined headgear. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1998; 113: 316-23.
• Kaya B, Arman A. Açık kapanış malok- luzyonların tedavisi. C Ü Diş Hek Fak Derg 2006; 1: 53-62
• Weinbach JR, Smith RJ. Cephalometric changes during treatment with the openbite bio- nator. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1992; 101: 367- 74.
• Kim YH. Anterior openbite and its treat- ment with multiloop edgewise archwire. Angle Orthod 1987; 57: 290-321.
• Lagerstrom LO, Nielsen IL, Lee R, Isaacson RJ. Dental and skeletal contributions to occlusal correction in patients treated with the high- pull headgear-activator combination. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1990; 97: 495-504.
• Graber TM, Vanarsdall RLJr. Orthodontics: Current principles and techniques. 2nd ed. St. Louis: Mosby-Year Book Inc; 1994, p: 437-506.
• Rübendüz M, Altuğ Z. Gelişim döneminde açık kapanışın monoblok-oksipital headgear-vertikal chin cup ile kombine tedavisinin iskelet yapı üzerine etkisi. TOD 1997; 10: 38-45.
• Küçükkeleş N, Acar A, Demirkaya AA, Evrenol B, Enacar A. Cephalometric evaluation of openbite treatment with NiTi archwires and anterior elastics. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1999; 116: 555- 62.