Skip Navigation


The European Journal of Orthodontics Advance Access originally published online on April 23, 2009
The European Journal of Orthodontics 2009 31(4):425-431; doi:10.1093/ejo/cjn114
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
31/4/425    most recent
cjn114v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Strahm, C.
Right arrow Articles by Kiliaridis, S.
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Strahm, C.
Right arrow Articles by Kiliaridis, S.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2009. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Orthodontic Society. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org.

Is bodily advancement of the lower incisors possible?

Catherine Strahm, Ana Paula De Sousa, Dominique Grobéty, Anestis Mavropoulos and Stavros Kiliaridis

Department of Orthodontics, University of Geneva, Switzerland

Address for correspondence Dr Catherine Strahm, Division d'Orthodontie, Ecole de Médecine dentaire, Rue Barthélémy-Menn 19, CH-1205 Genève, Switzerland, E-mail: cjp.strahm{at}bluewin.ch


  Abstract

Some Class II malocclusions are due, at least in part, to a retruded lower dental arch relative to the mandibular body. The purpose of this study was to determine if a direct anterior force on the lower incisors could lead to bodily movement of these teeth. Twenty-seven patients (9 males, 18 females; mean age: 9.8 years) were treated with a reverse headgear (RHG) in the lower dental arch combined with labial root torque of the lower incisors. An activator was added to disclude the arches. This group was compared with 26 patients (10 males, 16 females; mean age: 9.7 years) treated with an activator combined with conventional posterior extraoral traction on the upper molars. All patients had a second stage of treatment with fixed appliances and Class II elastic wear. At the end of treatment, all patients had a Class I relationship and a normal overjet. Lateral cephalograms were taken before (T1), after the first stage (T2), and at the end of active (T3) treatment. Independent sample t-tests were used to assess the differences between the two groups of patients.

In the RHG group, despite the applied root torque, the lower incisors showed anterior crown tipping. Labial root displacement was not observed. At T2, this labial tipping partially relapsed. Furthermore, the use of RHG appeared to decrease bone apposition in the anterior part of the symphysis, leading to a reduction in width. Bodily advancement of the lower incisors was not achieved with the application of labial root torque and anteriorly directed force on the mandibular arch. The width limit of the lower anterior apical base should be respected during orthodontic treatment planning.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.