Long-term profile changes in extraction and nonextraction patients

Stephens, Corbett K.; Boley, Jimmy C.; Behrents, Rolf G.; Alexander, Richard G.; Buschang, Peter H.

doi:10.1016/j.ajodo.2004.04.034

Cited by 66 publications

(59 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Disagreeing with the results of this study, it was observed that 23 orthodontists and laypeople perceived similarity between the profile changes after treatment. Contrary also to the results of this research, another work 21 did not denote significant differences between orthodontists and dentists.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 87%

“…This method was endorsed by several investigators 4,8,9,16,19,23 because of its simplicity and speed, being easily understood by the examiners and widespread in literature. In this study the VAS scale was characterized as a 100 mm line, where zero represented that profiles contained in the same sheet were the same and in the opposite extreme, that they were very different.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…On the other hand, those in favor of extraction, assume that in the treatment without extraction lips are too protruded due to protruded incisors. 23 The literature on the extraction dilemma in orthodontics is abundant and most studies show little soft tissue post-treatment alterations in patients with and without extractions. 2,12 Although cephalometric studies exhibit differences mainly in dento-skeletal components among patients treated with and without extraction, an important point would be to check the effect of these therapies in facial esthetics under the point of view of orthodontists, dentists and lay people, since the studies in this area are scarce.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Assessment of facial profile changes in patients treated with maxillary premolar extractions

Almeida–Pedrin¹,

Guimarães²,

Almeida

et al. 2012

Dental Press J. Orthod.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: Evaluate the facial profile changes of orthodontic treatment with extraction of two upper first premolars, from the perspective of orthodontists, dentists and lay people. Methods: Facial profiles of radiographs taken before and after treatment of 70 patients with Class II, division 1 malocclusion were traced. The silhouettes of the 70 patients were randomly assembled in an album with, being two profiles on each sheet of the same patient. Then, 30 orthodontists, 30 dentists and 30 lay people chose the more esthetic facial profile (A or B), and the amount of change they perceived between the two profiles before and after treatment, according to a visual analog scale (VAS). Results: The results revealed that 83 examiners preferred the posttreatment profiles, and only three dentists and four lay people chose the profiles pre-treatment more frequently. Thus, the orthodontists often chose the profiles after treatment, followed by dentists, with no statistically significant differences found between dentists and lay people. There were significant differences within groups in the preference of pre-and post-treatment profile. Furthermore, the three groups of evaluators indicated that pre and post-treatment profiles did not differ substantially. Conclusions:The treatment of Class II, division 1 malocclusion with extraction of two first premolars has a positive effect on facial profile esthetics. Objetivo: avaliar as alterações do perfil facial decorrentes do tratamento ortodôntico com extrações de dois primeiros pré--molares superiores, sob a óptica de ortodontistas, cirurgiões-dentistas e leigos. Métodos: foram traçados os perfis faciais das telerradiografias pré-e pós-tratamento de 70 pacientes com má oclusão de Classe II, divisão 1, e foi montado um álbum com as silhuetas dos 70 pacientes, de forma aleatória, sendo dois perfis em cada folha do mesmo paciente. A seguir, 30 ortodontistas, 30 cirurgiões-dentistas e 30 leigos escolheram o perfil facial mais estético (A ou B), e a quantidade de alteração que percebiam entre os dois perfis pré-e pós-tratamento, de acordo com a escala visual analógica (EVA). Resultados: os resultados revelaram que 83 examinadores preferiram o perfil pós-tratamento, sendo que somente três cirurgiões-dentistas e quatro leigos escolheram com maior frequência os perfis pré-tratamento. Assim, os ortodontistas escolheram mais frequentemente os perfis pós-tratamento, seguidos pelos cirurgiões-dentistas, sem diferença estatisticamente significativa entre cirurgiões-dentistas e leigos. Houve diferença estatisticamente significativa intragrupos na preferência do perfil pré-e pós-tratamento. Além disso, os três grupos de avaliadores indicaram que os perfis pré-e pós-tratamento não diferiram substancialmente. Conclusões: o tratamento da má oclusão de Classe II, divisão 1, com extração de dois primeiros pré-molares produziu um efeito positivo na estética do perfil facial.Palavras-chave: Extração dentária. Má oclusão Classe II de Angle. Ortodontia corretiva. Percepção.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 87%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Assessment of facial profile changes in patients treated with maxillary premolar extractions

Almeida–Pedrin¹,

Guimarães²,

Almeida

et al. 2012

Dental Press J. Orthod.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Interestingly, there have been only a few previous reports of soft tissue treatment effects in Class II cases with only two upper premolar extractions. [13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20] This present study was undertaken to evaluate the effects of upper premolar extractions in males and females with Class II division 1 or 2 malocclusions. It has been designed to assess the likely ranges of changes in the soft tissue lip profile and upper incisor positions and angulations and to search for factors that might be associated with those changes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Incisal and Soft Tissue Effects of Maxillary Premolar Extraction in Class II Treatment

Tadic

Woods

2007

The Angle Orthodontist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: This retrospective study was designed to show likely upper incisal and soft tissue lip changes accompanying Class II fixed appliance treatment with only two upper premolar extractions and to assess whether the lips, especially, are predictably and directly affected with such treatment. Materials and Methods: Pretreatment and posttreatment lateral cephalograms and study casts from 61 growing Class II patients (aged 11 to 18 years; 39 division 1 and 22 division 2) were assessed. Upper and lower lip curve depths, nasolabial angle, and upper incisal position and angulation were all assessed and compared with changes in other cephalometric variables. Results: A wide range of individual response in both lip and upper incisor behavior were noted. The observed soft tissue lip changes were most likely to be related to the preexisting morphology of the lips themselves, while upper incisal changes were mainly related to their own pretreatment positions and changes occurring with treatment in the underlying bony structures. Conclusion: Orthodontic treatment involving the extractions of only two upper premolars is likely to result in a wide range of variation in lip and upper incisor behavior. The preexisting soft tissue morphology is likely to be the greatest determinant of lip behavior.

show abstract

“…The greater lower lip thickness relation mentioned above may be due to initial excess overjet. Stephens et al (2005) studied 40 white Class I and Class II patients treated by the same orthodontist at an average of 15 years posttreatment. 20 patients were treated with four-premolar extraction and 20 were treated nonextraction.…”

Section: Soft Tissue Profilementioning

confidence: 99%

Longitudinal Cephalometric Changes of Orthodontic Patients Evaluated Long-Term

Ku¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Long-term profile changes in extraction and nonextraction patients

Cited by 66 publications

References 15 publications

Assessment of facial profile changes in patients treated with maxillary premolar extractions

Assessment of facial profile changes in patients treated with maxillary premolar extractions

Incisal and Soft Tissue Effects of Maxillary Premolar Extraction in Class II Treatment

Longitudinal Cephalometric Changes of Orthodontic Patients Evaluated Long-Term

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About