Àá½Ã¸¸ ±â´Ù·Á ÁÖ¼¼¿ä. ·ÎµùÁßÀÔ´Ï´Ù.

Three-dimensional evaluation of tooth movement in Class II malocclusions treated without extraction by orthodontic mini-implant anchorage

Korean Journal of Orthodontics 2016³â 46±Ç 5È£ p.280 ~ 289
Ali Dler, Mohammed Hnd, Koo Seung-Hwan, °­°æÈ­, ±è»óö,
¼Ò¼Ó »ó¼¼Á¤º¸
 ( Ali Dler ) - Wonkwang University School of Dentistry Department of Orthodontics
 ( Mohammed Hnd ) - Wonkwang University School of Dentistry Department of Prosthodontics
 ( Koo Seung-Hwan ) - Wonkwang University School of Dentistry Department of Orthodontics
°­°æÈ­ ( Kang Kyung-Hwa ) - Wonkwang University School of Dentistry Department of Orthodontics
±è»óö ( Kim Sang-Cheol ) - Wonkwang University School of Dentistry Department of Orthodontics

Abstract


Objective: The aim of this study was to analyze tooth movement and arch width changes in maxillary dentition following nonextraction treatment with orthodontic mini-implant (OMI) anchorage in Class II division 1 malocclusions.

Methods: Seventeen adult patients diagnosed with Angle¡¯s Class II division 1 malocclusion were treated by nonextraction with OMIs as anchorage for distalization of whole maxillary dentition. Three-dimensional virtual maxillary models were superimposed with the best-fit method at the pretreatment and post-treatment stages. Linear, angular, and arch width variables were measured using Rapidform 2006 software, and analyzed by the paired t-test.

Results: All maxillary teeth showed statistically significant movement posteriorly (p < 0.05). There were no significant changes in the vertical position of the maxillary teeth, except that the second molars were extruded (0.86 mm, p < 0.01). The maxillary first and second molars were rotated distal-in (4.5o, p < 0.001; 3.0o, p < 0.05, respectively). The intersecond molar width increased slightly (0.1 mm, p > 0.05) and the intercanine, interfirst premolar, intersecond premolar, and interfirst molar widths increased significantly (2.2 mm, p < 0.01; 2.2 mm, p < 0.05; 1.9 mm, p < 0.01; 2.0 mm, p < 0.01; respectively).

Conclusions: Nonextraction treatment with OMI anchorage for Class II division 1 malocclusions could retract the whole maxillary dentition to achieve a Class I canine and molar relationship without a change in the vertical position of the teeth; however, the second molars were significantly extruded. Simultaneously, the maxillary arch was shown to be expanded with distal-in rotation of the molars.

Å°¿öµå

Tooth movement; Class II division 1 malocclusion; Nonextractiontreatment; Mini-implant anchorage

¿ø¹® ¹× ¸µÅ©¾Æ¿ô Á¤º¸

   

µîÀçÀú³Î Á¤º¸

SCI(E)
KCI
KoreaMed