Lower arch perimeter preservation using the lingual arch

Rebellato, Joe; Lindauer, Steven J.; Rubenstein, Loretta K.; Isaacson, Robert J.; Davidovitch, Moshe; Vroom, Katherine

doi:10.1016/s0889-5406(97)70054-4

Cited by 57 publications

(58 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…[1][2][3][4][5] By preventing the so-called late mesial shift through preservation of the E-space, several millimeters of arch length can be gained to alleviate incisor irregularity and to potentially eliminate the need for premolar extractions. Although the popularity of this treatment approach is unreported, practice data would suggest that this treatment method should be adopted, as demonstrated by a downward trend in the percentage of extraction cases from 1986 to 2008, going from 35% to 18%.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Rebellato et al 1 demonstrated the effectiveness of a lingual arch in preventing mesial migration of the first permanent molars, thus maintaining arch length through the transition from late mixed dentition to permanent dentition. Brennan and Gianelly 2 showed that significant crowding of mandibular incisors of up to almost 5 mm could be resolved through placement of a passive lower lingual holding arch.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

E-space preservation

Sonis¹,

Ackerman²

2011

The Angle Orthodontist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To determine the relationship of E-space preservation with lingual holding arches to mandibular permanent second molar impaction. Methods: Two hundred consecutively treated patients undergoing nonextraction treatment for incisor crowding were entered into the study. Lower incisor crowding was assessed by the Little Irregularity Index. Treatment involved E-space preservation via a passive lingual arch placed prior to exfoliation of the second primary molar. Panoramic and cephalometric radiographs were analyzed for any significant relationship of mandibular permanent second molar impaction relative to molar angulation, spacing, growth pattern, and skeletal relationships. Results: Twenty-nine patients had at least one impacted second molar (14.5%). Of a possible 400 mandibular second molars, 34 were determined to be impacted (8.5%). Only the mandibular first molar-second molar angulation was found to be significant (P , .001). Pretreatment intermolar angulation of 24 degrees had a positive predictive value of 1. Conclusion: Impaction of permanent second mandibular molars in patients undergoing nonextraction via E-space preservation with a passive lingual arch is 10 to 20 times more prevalent than that observed in the general population. Risk of impaction is best predicted by the pretreatment intermolar angulation between first and second permanent mandibular molars. (Angle Orthod. 2011;81:1045-1049

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

E-space preservation

Sonis¹,

Ackerman²

2011

The Angle Orthodontist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Findings from previous studies [5,[16][17][18] demonstrated that a passive lingual arch is effective in preserving a lower arch length during the transition from mixed to permanent dentition.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The lingual arch maintains the arch perimeter by preventing mesial tipping or mandibular first molar drift. The molar positions are stabilized, to some extent, against the mandibular incisor thanks to the appliance, which also prevents the incisor from tipping lingually [5,6] .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effectiveness of the Passive Lingual Arch for E Space Maintenance in Subjects with Anterior or Posterior Rotation of the Mandible: A Retrospective Study

Fichera¹,

Greco²,

Leonardi³

2011

Med Princ Pract

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: The aim of this study was to determine whether or not lingual arches in subjects with anterior or posterior mandible rotation can produce different effects in the prevention of first permanent molar mesial migration. Subjects and Methods: Forty-two patients with a mean age of 9 ± 0.8 years were selected from the Department of Orthodontics, University of Catania, Italy. These subjects were treated with a passive mandibular fixed lingual arch. The sample was divided into 3 groups according to the gonial angle in order to establish the pattern of mandible growth: mandibular posterior rotation (MPR), mandibular growth in straight-downward direction (MSD) and mandibular anterior rotation (MAR). Lateral cephalograms and study models of the patients before and after treatment were examined to determine any positional changes of the mandibular first molars and incisors. Results: Statistically significant differences between the MPR group and the other 2 (MSD and MAR) were found as regards mandibular first molar and incisor positional changes. No significant differences were found between the MSD and MAR groups. Conclusion: The results indicate that the effect of lingual arch is influenced by mandibular growth patterns. In patients with MPR, the lingual arch preserves arch length but the mesial migration of first permanent molars is not completely blocked.

show abstract

“…In this condition, the incisors erupt close to the alveolar ridge line, characterizing mild crowding, which usually is self-corrected during normal occlusion development (13). However, due to the premature loss of the primary canine, there was a reduction of dental arch length, showing lack of space for the right second premolar, which caused secondary crowding (14). In this case, we chose to maintain the space with a Nance lingual arch for 18 months, thus coinciding with the end of the interceptive stage.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The nance lingual arch: an auxiliary device in solving lower anterior crowding

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

After exfoliation of the primary incisors and eruption of the permanent incisors, the dentist has the opportunity of observing closely the beginning of occlusal changes. In several cases, alterations, such as lower anterior crowding, can be prevented and treated with proper follow-up. In the mixed dentition, one of the mechanisms for maintaining space and favoring dental alignment is to preserve leeway space before permanent second molar irruption. Among the devices with this function, the Nance lingual arch helps maintaining the position of the permanent mandibular molars and incisors after a premature loss of the primary canines. This paper describes the applicability of Nance lingual arch for preserving leeway space, thus contributing for correction of lower anterior crowding.

show abstract

Lower arch perimeter preservation using the lingual arch

Cited by 57 publications

References 14 publications

E-space preservation

E-space preservation

Effectiveness of the Passive Lingual Arch for E Space Maintenance in Subjects with Anterior or Posterior Rotation of the Mandible: A Retrospective Study

The nance lingual arch: an auxiliary device in solving lower anterior crowding

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About