Skip Navigation



The European Journal of Orthodontics Advance Access published online on October 18, 2007
The European Journal of Orthodontics, doi:10.1093/ejo/cjm083
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
30/1/73    most recent
cjm083v1
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 Altug-Atac, A. T.
Right arrow Articles by Arat, Z. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Altug-Atac, A. T.
Right arrow Articles by Arat, Z. M.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2007. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Orthodontic Society. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org.

Three-dimensional bimetric maxillary distalization arches compared with a modified Begg intraoral distalization system

Ayse Tuba Altug-Atac, Dilek Erdem and Züleyha Mirzen Arat

Department of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, University of Ankara, Turkey

Address for correspondence, Ayse Tuba Altug-Atac, Ankara Universitesi, Dis Hekimligi Fakultesi, Ortodonti Anabilim Dali, 06500 Besevler, Ankara, Turkey, E-mail: aysealtug{at}yahoo.com


  Abstract

The purpose of this study was to compare the dentofacial effects of two intraoral molar distalization techniques [three-dimensional bimetric maxillary distalization arches (3D-BMDA) and a modified Begg intraoral distalization system (MBIDS)] in subjects requiring maxillary molar distalization. Twenty-one patients (12 females and 9 males, mean age pre-treatment: 14.7 ± 1.50 years) were treated with the 3D-BMDA and 17 (14 females and 3 males, mean age pre-treatment: 14.4 ± 1.43 years) with the MBIDS. Measurements were recorded from lateral cephalometric radiographs taken at two different points in time: at the start of treatment for the MBIDS group and prior to distalization for the 3D-BMDA group (T1) and post-distalization (T2). Student's t- and paired t-tests were used to determine differences between and within the groups.

The total amount of distalization for the 3D-BMDA and MBIDS groups was similar (3.55 and 3.27 mm, respectively). However, there were statistically significant differences in the length of the distalization period (3.4 and 6.5 months, respectively) and the amount monthly of distalization (1.11 and 0.54 mm, respectively). The most significant differences were observed in the mandibular dental arches and vertical facial dimensions. Anchorage loss in the mandible was greater in the 3D-BMDA group, whereas increases in facial dimensions were greater in the MBIDS group. Both 3D-BMDA and MBIDS techniques were found to be effective to obtain distal movement of the maxillary molars. In order to achieve successful results, the side-effects of each treatment modality on dentofacial structures need to be taken into consideration.


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.