Osseointegrated titanium implants for maxillofacial protraction in monkeys

Smalley, Ward M.; Shapiro, Peter A.; Hohl, Thomas H.; Kōkich, Vincent G.; Brånemark, Per‐Ingvar

doi:10.1016/0889-5406(88)90053-4

Cited by 158 publications

(75 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…1,2,4,9 Several clinical studies showed that implants have the potential to resist orthodontic forces, 7,27,28 which has also been proved with histological studies. 29,30 Although their success in maintaining anchorage is certain, implants nevertheless have some limitations including the fact that they cannot be immediately loaded due to need of an osseointegration period, in addition to increased costs and additional surgical procedure during removal. Screws can provide sufficient anchorage, require simple and less invasive surgical procedures and are less costly relative to implants.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Noncompliance screw supported maxillary molar distalization in a parallel manner

Nalçacı

Bıçakçı

Özan³

2010

Korean J Orthod

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: Intraoral noncompliance upper molar distalization techniques have gained in popularity and have subsequently found to be successful in Class II correction. The aim of the present study was to introduce a screw supported intraoral distalization appliance and investigate its efficiency. Methods: Twenty-one subjects (11 females, 10 males; average age of 14.9 years) with Angle Class II malocclusion participated in this study. Two screws were inserted behind the incisive foramen and immediately loaded to distalize the upper first molars. An intraoral screw supported distalization appliance was used to distalize the upper molars in order to achieve a Class I molar relationship. Skeletal and dental changes were evaluated using cephalometric and three-dimensional (3D) model analysis. Results: Upper molars were distalized 3.95 mm on average and a Class I molar relationship was achieved without any anchorage loss. The upper molars were tipped only 1.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Noncompliance screw supported maxillary molar distalization in a parallel manner

Nalçacı

Bıçakçı

Özan³

2010

Korean J Orthod

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The literature has shown that dental implants can be used as anchors for both orthodontic and orthopaedic movement. [5][6][7] It can also serve to create space between teeth so that implants can be placed.…”

Section: Casementioning

confidence: 99%

An interdisciplinary approach to treatment planning in implant dentistry

Jivraj

Corrado²,

Chee

2007

Br Dent J

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Numerous appliance designs such as endosseous implants [1], ankylozed teeth [2], surgically assisted orthopedic protraction [3], distraction osteogenesis [4,5], Hybrid Hyrax appliance [6], reverse chin cup [7,8], face mask [9], tongue appliance [10][11][12], and tongue plate [13] have been used for treatment of skeletal Cl III malocclusions. Forward displacement of the maxilla, labial tipping of the maxillary incisors, counter clockwise rotation of the palatal plane, inhibition of anterior mandibular growth, increase of face height, clockwise rotation of the mandible and lingual tipping of the lower incisors have all been shown to take place [14][15][16].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effects of Maxillary Protrusion on Pharyngeal Airway Dimensions

Jamilian¹,

Showkatbakhsh²,

Borna³

et al. 2014

J Dent Probl Solut

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim:The relationship between position of the maxillary structures caused by maxillary protraction therapy and airway dimensions has not been investigated as comprehensively as the skeletal changes. This study was conducted to evaluate the effects of treatment with a maxillary protraction appliance on upper airway dimensions. Material and Methods:Twenty Five patients including 13 females, 12 males with the mean age of 10.66 years (range, +0.7, -0.8 years) with skeletal Cl III malocclusion due to maxillary deficiency were selected in this study. All of the patients were treated by using a maxillary protraction (Tongue Appliance) as the only treatment appliance. Lateral cephalograms were taken before and after treatment. Data were analyzed statistically by means of paired T-test. Results:No significant increase in the width of upper and middle horizontal airway dimension was seen. Significant increases were observed in the length of vertical airway dimension (P<0.001). Conclusion:These results demonstrated that Tongue Appliance doesn't affect sagittal airway dimensions but it increases vertical dimensions in the short time.Therefore, the purpose of this study was to examine the effects of an intra-oral maxillary protraction appliance named tongue appliance on the dimensions of the upper airway in patients with Cl III malocclusion and maxillary deficiency. Materials and MethodsThe study was done according to the ethical principles of the Declaration of Helsinki.In this study 25 patients (13 females, 12 males) with mean age of 10.6 (SD 0.7) years who were treated with tongue appliance were selected. All samples had following inclusion criteria.Presence of a skeletal Cl III malocclusion due to maxillary deficiency with SNA≤78. SNB ≤80. ANB ≤0 Edge to edge incisor relationship or anterior crossbite, flat or concave facial profile.The patients were treated with tongue appliance alone.4-No other congenital anomalies, endocrine, nasopharyngeal disorders, tonsillitis, adenitis, previous orthopedic, orthodontic treatment, and rhinoplasty were present.Tongue appliance [10] used for the treatment of the samples was constructed by Adams clasps for first upper molars and c clasps in the anterior teeth in order to increase the retention. Three to five separate spurs incorporated in the palatal between canine to canine areas. These spurs were as long as to cage the tongue and they were adjusted in clinic to avoid traumatizing the floor of the mouth. This appliance was used for approximately 22 hours a day. The average treatment IntroductionThe skeletal and dentoalveolar effects of orthopedic appliances in patients with Class III (Cl III) malocclusions and maxillary deficiency have been well documented in literature. Numerous appliance designs such as endosseous implants [1], ankylozed teeth [2], surgically assisted orthopedic protraction [3], distraction osteogenesis [4,5], Hybrid Hyrax appliance [6], reverse chin cup [7,8], face mask [9], tongue appliance [10][11][12], and tongue plate [13] have been used for treatment ...

show abstract

Osseointegrated titanium implants for maxillofacial protraction in monkeys

Cited by 158 publications

References 25 publications

Noncompliance screw supported maxillary molar distalization in a parallel manner

Noncompliance screw supported maxillary molar distalization in a parallel manner

An interdisciplinary approach to treatment planning in implant dentistry

The Effects of Maxillary Protrusion on Pharyngeal Airway Dimensions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About