Arch width changes in patients with Class II division 1 malocclusion treated with maxillary first premolar extraction and non-extraction method

Abstract

BackgroundThe aim of this study was to determine arch width changes during maxillary first premolars extraction and non-extraction treatment in patients with Class II division 1 malocclusion.Material and Methods Dental casts of 91 Class II division 1 patients (36 males and 55 females) were evaluated. The minimum age of the subjects at the beginning of treatment was above 16 years. 48 patients were treated with extraction of the maxillary first premolars and 43 patients were treated without extraction. Pre- and post-treatment maxillary and mandibular inter-canine and inter-molar arch widths were measured.ResultsAt the end of treatment, maxillary and mandibular inter-canine widths of both groups increased significantly. The maxillary inter-molar width decreased in the extraction group and increased in the non-extraction group. The mandibular inter-molar width increased significantly in both groups. No significant differences were observed between males and females.ConclusionsThe results of this study indicated that there was a tendency for an increase in arch width during both the extraction and non-extraction treatment except maxillary inter-molar width in the extraction cases. Key words:Dental arch, malocclusion, angle Class II, tooth movement, extraction.

Morphological Characteristics of the Cranial Base of Early Angle's Class II Division 1 Malocclusion in Permanent Teeth

“…There still has been lack of systematic study on effects of morphological characteristics of sagittal and vertical cranial base on the formation and development of Angle's class II division 1 malocclusion (Hsu et al, 2016;Nilsson et al, 2016;Shirazi et al, 2016). Thus, this study selected lateral radiographs of the skull of 80 patients at the age of 12 to 14 years (early permanent dentition), with an equal number of males and females.…”

“…Craniofacial complex is composed of neurocranium, viscerocranium, and cranial base (Lewis et al,1985;Enlow et al, 2007;van Limborgh et al, 2012). The cranial base is the main supporting structure in the midface.…”

A Novel Spring for Impacted Canine Traction: A New Method presentation

“…Impacted canine treatment is a challenging issue in orthodontics (15,16). Several methods have been introduced for impacted canine traction and each method has some advantages described by authors.…”

Sealing efficacy of mineral trioxide aggregate with and without nanosilver for root end filling: An in-vitro bacterial leakage study

“…2438). According to the study performed by Erkut et al ( 10 ), and considering α equal to 0.05 and power of 80% ( 11 ) with 15 % difference in microleakage, twenty six samples in each group was needed. However, thirty samples per each group were used to increase the power of study.…”