Home Subscription Services
 
   

 
World Journal of Orthodontics
WJO Home Page
About the Editor
Editorial Board
Reprints / Articles
Permissions
Advertising
MEDLINE Search
 
 
 
 
 
FacebookTwitterYouTube
Quintessence Publishing: Journals: ORTHODONTICS
ORTHODONTICS
The Art and Practice of Dentofacial Enhancement

Formerly World Journal of Orthodontics

Edited by
Rafi Romano, DMD, MSc (Editor-in-Chief)

ISSN 2160-2999 (print) / ISSN 2160-3006 (online)

Visit the ORTHODONTICS: The Art and Practice of Dentofacial Enhancement Facebook page

Publication:
Summer 2006
Volume 7 , Issue 2

Back
Share Abstract:

A COMPARISON OF THE EFFECTS OF 2 MANDIBULAR ANCHORAGE SYSTEMS USED WITH A 3-DIMENSIONAL BIMETRIC MAXILLARY DISTALIZING ARCH

Candan Okay, DDS, PhD / Ays¸e Gülsen, DDS, PhD / Alaaddin Keykubat, DDS, PhD / Tuba Tortop Ücem, DDS, PhD / Sema Yüksel, DDS, PhD

Pages: 125–133
PMID: 16779970

The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of 2 mandibular anchorage systems used with a 3-dimensional bimetric maxillary distalizing arch. The Wilson rapid molar distalization appliance for Class II molar correction was used with 26 patients; two groups of 13 patients each were formed. In the first group (9 girls, 4 boys with a mean age 11 years 5 months), mandibular anchorage was gained by a modified lip bumper with a standard lingual arch of 0.9-mm stainless steel. The second group (7 girls, 6 boys, with a mean age of 13 years) had a 0.016 3 0.016-inch utility arch, with a 3-dimensional lingual arch for anchorage. Cephalometric radiographs were taken before and after maxillary first molar distalization. The treatment results showed that the extrusion of the mandibular first molar was statistically significant in both the modified lip bumper and utility arch groups (P < .01 and P < .05, respectively). The incisal edge of the mandibular incisor moved forward significantly in the modified lip bumper and utility arch groups (P < .05 and P < .01, respectively); however, the protrusion in the utility arch group was significantly greater than in the lip bumper group (P < .05). In both groups, significant proclination of the mandibular incisor was observed (P < .01). Comparison of the anchor units showed that there was significantly greater proclination in the utility arch group than in the modified lip bumper group (P < .05). Both anchor units similarly enhanced the mandibular first molar anchorage. However, particularly in the utility group, mandibular incisor anchorage control seemed to be inadequate. World J Orthod 2006;7:125–133.

Full Text PDF File | Order Article

 

 
Get Adobe Reader
Adobe Acrobat Reader is required to view PDF files.
This is a free program available from the Adobe web site.
Follow the download directions on the Adobe web site
to get your copy of Adobe Acrobat Reader.
  © 2014 Quintessence Publishing Co Inc
 

Home | Subscription Services | Books | Journals | Multimedia | Events | Blog
Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | About Us | Contact Us | Advertising | Help | Sitemap | Catalog