Canine retraction is a very important step in treatment of patients with crowding, or first premolar extraction cases. In severe crowding cases until, the canines have been distilized to relive the crowding, space to correctly align the incisors will not be available. Correct positioning of the canines after retraction is of great importance for the function, stability, and esthetics. The aim of this systematic review was to examine, in an evidence-based way, which kinds of canine retraction methods/techniques are most effective and which have the least side effects. A literature survey was performed by applying the Medline Database (Entrez PubMed) and Science Direct database covering the period from 1985 to 2014, to find out efficient ways to accomplish canine retraction. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), prospective and retrospective controlled studies, and clinical trials were included. Two reviewers selected and extracted the data independently and assessed the quality of the retrieved studies. The search strategy resulted in 324 articles, of which 22 met the inclusion criteria. Due to the vast heterogeneity in study methods, the scientific evidence was too weak to evaluate retraction efficiency during space closure. The data so far reviewed proved that elastomeric power chains, elastic threads, magnets, NiTi coil springs, corticotomies, distraction osteogenesis, and laser therapy, all are able to provide optimum rate of tooth movements. All the methods were nearly similar to each other for retraction of canines Most of the techniques lead to anchorage loss in various amounts depending on the methods used. Most of the studies had serious problems with small sample size, confounding factors, lack of method error analysis, and no blinding in measurements. To obtain reliable scientific evidence, controlled RCT's with sufficient sample sizes are needed to determine which method/technique is the most effective in the respective retraction situation. Further studies should also consider patient acceptance and cost analysis as well as implants and minor surgeries for canine retraction.

No abstract

The aim of this study was to correlate the morphological facial index and canine relationship in adults. Materials and method: The research was conducted on 1000 subjects (563 males and 437 females), aged 18-40 years, selected randomly. The parameters were morphological facial height and facial width. The standard spreading caliper with its scale was used for the measurement of facial parameters. Canine relationship was observed intra-orally with the subjects seated on the dental chair. Result: Euryprosopic facial type (53.2%) was most common in majority of the subjects followed by Mesoprosopic (21.6%), Hypereuryprosopic (19%), Leptoprosopic (5.6%) and the least common was Hyperleptoprosopic (0.6%). The canine relation was mostly Class I in both the genders, females showed a higher value of Class II and Class III canine relation. Conclusion: The overall majority had the euryprosopic facial type and there was no significant association between facial morphologic types and canine relationship in both the genders in different age groups at either side. The canine relationship association with facial morphologic type was significant only for left side.

No abstract

Keywords: Golden proportion, Aesthetic smile, Tooth sizes Aim: This study aimed to investigate the existence of the golden proportion between the widths of the maxillary anterior teeth in individuals with an aesthetic smile.

Change is the only thing which is constant. With the increase in the number of adult patients seeking orthodontic treatment there was a slight downfall in relation with acceptance of orthodontic treatment due to poor aesthetics. The limitations with the previous method was the prime reason of coming up will something more aesthetic and patient friendly. The fact that treatment could be carried out making it look less conspicuous drove the attention of patients as well as the practioners. Thus, there was more research on the bracket type, the basic difference between labial and lingual orthodontics in terms of biomechanics, anchorage control treatment planning and execution. Precise bracket positioning in extremely important to achieve good quality results, this further up surged interest in the laboratory procedure which would help to obtain desirable results. This article thus provides a fair overview of how lingual orthodontics differs from labial orthodontics in many aspects and the need to study it in greater detail.

Objective To evaluate changes in the anchor molar position (horizontal, vertical) after retraction in bimaxillary protrusion maximum anchorage cases. Materials and Methods Thirty patients requiring maximum anchorage after extraction of the first premolars were selected for this study. The second molars were banded in both arches along with trans-palatal arch in the maxillary arch and lingual arch in the mandibular arch. En mass retraction was done using sliding mechanics. Horizontal and vertical positions of the anchor first molars were evaluated cephalometrically before and after orthodontic retraction. Results In the horizontal plane, maxillary first molars showed net mesial movement of 1.72 mm, and there was a statistical difference between the pre- and post-values (P < 0.001). The mandibular molars showed a net horizontal movement of 2.26 mm, and there was a statistically significant difference between the pre- and post-values (P < 0.001). In the vertical plane, there was vertical movement of the maxillary anchor molars by a net value of 0.95 mm which was statistically significant (P < 0.001). The mandibular anchor molars moved vertically by a net value of 0.45 mm. This difference was statistically not significant. Conclusion There was anchorage loss seen in both the planes (horizontal, vertical) of the maxillary anchor molars. In the mandibular anchor molars, there was anchorage loss seen only in the horizontal plane. No anchorage loss was seen in the vertical plane.

AIM:The aim of this study was to evaluate sexual dimorphism in nasal proportions of Class I and Class II skeletal malocclusions in adults.MATERIAL AND METHODS:The sample comprised 120 patients (females 18 years and above and males 21 years and above), with no history of previous orthodontic treatment or functional jaw orthopedic treatment. They were divided into different groups based on point A-Nasion-point B (ANB) angle and gender. Groups I and II included 30 males and 30 females with skeletal class I malocclusion (ANB 0–4 degrees). Groups III and IV included 30 males and 30 females with skeletal class II malocclusion, respectively (ANB above 4 degrees).RESULTS:In regards to the comparison between males and females (Class I + Class II), nasal length (P < 0.001), nasal depth 1 (P < 0.001), nasal depth 2 (P < 0.001), nasobasal angle (P < 0.001), soft tissue convexity angle (P < 0.001), and nasal bone length (P < 0.008) were found to be statistically significant. Nasobasal angle was found to be significantly higher in females than in males (Class I) (P < 0.001). Nasolabial angle was prominent in class I males than in class I females (P < 0.001). Soft tissue convexity angle of Class I participants was significantly lower than that of Class II participants (P < 0.001), whereas nasobasal angle and nasomental angle of Class I participants were found to be significantly higher than that of Class II participants (P < 0.001).CONCLUSION:Sexual dimorphism was found in various nasal parameters. Significant amount of differences was found in the nasal proportions of Class I and Class II (male and female) participants.