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

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

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.