Objective:The purpose of this prospective observational study was to evaluate the relationship between nasal morphology and maxillary skeletal pattern. The clinical significance was to emphasize the importance of role of nasal pattern in diagnosis and treatment planning.Materials and Methods:The sample included the pre-treatment lateral cephalometric radiographs of 180 South Indian adults (94 women, 86 men), aged 18 to 28 years. Six maxillary and six nasal soft tissue parameters were measured. Pearson correlation coefficients and Analysis of variance were used for statistical analyses.Results:There were significant correlations between maxillary vertical and sagittal, skeletal and soft tissue parameters. The Mean and standard deviations were correlated between low insignificant range to high significant levels with nasal length, nasal depth and columella convexity. Nasal length also showed significant correlation with inclination of palatal plane. Significant influence of gender was seen on nasal length, nasal depth, columella convexity and nasal tip angle. A statistically significant difference was seen regarding nasal length between males and females, with nasal length being more in males (50.26 ± 4.18) than in females (48.86 ± 3.45), nasal depth being more in males (18.64 ± 2.56) than in females (16.63 ± 2.16), columella convexity being greater in males (4.31 ± 1.26) than in females (3.41 ± 1.13), nasolabial angle decreased in males (87.26° ±13.79°) than in females (89.38° ±15.72°) and nasal tip angle being more in females (80.18° ±9.44°) than in males (73.60° ±10.24°). There was no statistically significant difference in nasal hump between males (-2.01 ± 1.76) and females (-2.02 ± 1.62).Conclusion:Long nose with increased nasal prominence were seen with increase in the anteroposterior length and vertical height of maxilla. Male and female genders had a varied amount of nasal length, nasal depth and columella convexity along with nasal tip angle.
BackgroundTo evaluate the closure of midline diastema using the Neodymium-Iron-Boron magnets and to compare the treatment duration of midline diastemas with the use of magnets compared to regular orthodontic treatment.Material and MethodsThirty patients with age group 12 to 30 years with the midline diastema ranging from 0.5 to 3mm were selected. These patients were divided into two groups. Diastema closure in one group was accomplished by conventional method, in other group was done with Ne2Fe14B magnets. These magnets were fitted to the labial surfaces of the maxillary central incisors such a way that the opposite poles of the magnets face each other. At each appointment, study models and radiographs were taken for study subjects and the midline diastema was measured using digital vernier calipers on the study models obtained. Descriptive statistics carried out using Paired t-test.ResultsSubjects treated with Ne2Fe14B magnets showed a significant difference compared to fixed orthodontic appliance subjects with respect to time of closure, rate of space closure and incisal inclination. Significant difference between 2 groups with reduction of 64.6 days in time to diastema closure in subjects treated with Ne2Fe14B magnets (P<0.05).ConclusionsNe2Fe14B magnets more efficient in complete closure of mid line diastema in less duration of time. Key words:Midline diastema, Ne2Fe14B magnets, rare earth magnets, space closure.
Ortho organizers manufactured stainless steel arch wires 0.019 X 0.025" straight lengths 60 in number were considered for measuring static frictional resistance. Results:The mean slot width and depth of new brackets were 0.0251" and 0.0471", which exceeded the manufacturers reported nominal size of 0.022" X 0.030", by 0.003" and 0.017". The reconditioned brackets demonstrated a further increase in mean slot width and depth to 0.028" and 0.0518" that is by 0.0035" and 0.0047" which is statistically significant (p=0.001, 0.002).The mean static frictional forces of the reconditioned brackets was nearly similar to that of new brackets that is 0.3167N for reconditioned brackets and 0.2613 N for new brackets. Conclusion:Although the reconditioning process results in physical changes to bracket structure this does not appear to result in significant effect on ex-vivo static frictional resistance.
Background and Objectives:In orthodontic diagnosis and treatment planning, assessment of anteroposterior discrepancy is of importance to the orthodontist. Both angular and linear measurements have been incorporated into various cephalometric analyses to help the clinician diagnose anteroposterior discrepancies and establish the most appropriate treatment plan. Hence the present study is designed to establish the norms of Beta angle to assess the sagittal discrepancy for Nellore district population.Materials and Methods:The sample was screened from the old records of the Orthodontic department of Narayana Dental College and Hospital. One hundred and fifty pretreatment cephalometric radiographs (50 each of Class I, II, and III) were subdivided based on ANB, Wits appraisal, and Beta angle into skeletal Class I, II, III. The same cephalograms were again classified into skeletal Class I, II, and III based purely on Beta angle. Each group was again divided into 2 subgroups consisting of 25 male and 25 female subjects with a mean age limit between 15 and 45 years old.Results:The Newman-keuls post hoc test and ANOVA showed that the 3 groups were significantly different (P ≤ 0.001). The Newman-keuls post hoc test also found the groups to be significantly different.Conclusions:There was statistically significant difference for, the mean values and the standard deviation for Beta angle within the three skeletal patterns (Class I, Class II and Class III skeletal patterns). There was no statistically significant difference among the mean values of beta angle between Nellore district population and Caucasian norms and between male and female sex groups.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.