Pendulum appliances with 2 anchorage designs: Conventional anchorage vs bone anchorage

Polat-Özsoy, Ömür; Kırcelli, Beyza Hancıoğlu; Arman-Özçırpıcı, Ayça; Pektas, Zafer Ozgur; Uçkan, Sina

doi:10.1016/j.ajodo.2007.10.002

Cited by 65 publications

(83 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…1 Similar to other distalizing appliances, the Pendulum appliance seems to correct the Class II molar relationship mainly by dentoalveolar changes rather than by maxillary growth restriction. 2 Once a Class I molar relationship is obtained, maxillary molars tend to move forward as a dentoalveolar compensation following the concomitant forward movement of the maxilla and the mandible.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Long-term evaluation of the molar movements following Pendulum and fixed appliances

Caprioglio

Fontana²,

Longoni

et al. 2012

The Angle Orthodontist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To describe the molar movements and skeletal changes associated with Pendulumfixed appliance treatment and the long-term postretention period. Subjects and Methods: The treatment sample consisted of 76 Class II patients, 35 males and 41 females. Lateral cephalograms were obtained at the start of treatment (T1); the end of distalization (T2); the end of orthodontic fixed appliance therapy (T3); and long-term observation (7 years 2 months later; T4). Mean age was 12 years 11 months at T1, 13 years 8 months at T2, 15 years 4 months at T3, and 22 years 5 months at T4. The average amount of Class II molar relationship was 3.1 mm, with a mean overjet of 5.9 mm at the beginning of treatment. A paired t-test was used to identify significant between-group differences between T2-T4 and T3-T4. Results: Distal molar movement was obtained during the distalization phase (T2), and more than half of the distalizing effect was maintained at the end of maxillary growth (T4). Most of the relapse occurred during fixed appliance therapy (T3), whereas no significant change was detected in the postretention period (T4). The molar relationship did not show any significant difference between T2 and T4. The vertical facial dimension increased during the distalization phase (T2) and fixed appliance therapy (T3) but returned to the initial values during the postretention period (T4). Conclusions: The Pendulum appliance induces significant dentoalveolar effects, which can be partially maintained during the long-term period. The Class I molar relationship does not change during completion of individual growth. Increase in vertical facial dimension represents a temporary effect. (Angle Orthod. 2013;83:447-454.)

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Long-term evaluation of the molar movements following Pendulum and fixed appliances

Caprioglio

Fontana²,

Longoni

et al. 2012

The Angle Orthodontist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the studies with comparable distalization techniques, the distal movements of the maxillary molars were from 3.9 to 6.4 mm [7,8], at the same time, the maxillary incisors remained stable. According to Lee JS.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Orthodontics Miniscrews to Correct an Anchorage Loss: Case Report

Houb-Dine¹,

F²

2017

J Oral Health Craniofac Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The recent introduction of the miniscrew in orthodontics revolutionized the clinical and biomechanical approach of anchoring. Used as direct or indirect anchoring, the orthodontic micro screws indications fi eld is expanding due to their easy insertion, and their immediate loading ensuring an absolute anchoring. Our objective through this clinical case is to show the effectiveness of these miniscrews in the correction of the uncontrolled loss of anchoring.

show abstract

“…Com uma lança manual é feita uma marcação na cortical óssea na região da inserção, fio dental é adicionado à chave digital e ao mini-implante como forma de segurança e conjunto chave digital com o mini-implante é girado em sentido horário no momento da inserção. THOMAS, 1989;HILGERS, 1992;JONES;WHITE, 1992;TESTA, 1996;GHOSH;NANDA, 1996;SNODGRASS, 1996;HENRIQUES et al, 1998;PARRI, 1999;BOWMAN, 2000;BRICKMAN;SINHA;NANDA, 2000;KELES;SAYINSU, 2000;BASCIFTCI;POLAT, 2002;MAVROPOULOS et al, 2005;ANGELIERI et al, 2006;PATEL et al, 2009 LIOU, 2003;GELGOR et al, 2004;KIRCELLI;PEKTAS;KIRCELLI, 2006;BUYUKYILMAZ, 2007;ONCAG et al, 2007;POLAT-OZSOY et al, 2008;FUDALEJ;ANTOSZEWSKA, 2011;GREC, 2011).…”

Section: T734aunclassified

Avaliação das alterações dentoesqueléticas de jovens com má oclusão de Classe II tratados com aparelho distalizador First Class Modificado, utilizando modelos digitais e análise cefalométrica

Dias¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Pendulum appliances with 2 anchorage designs: Conventional anchorage vs bone anchorage

Cited by 65 publications

References 23 publications

Long-term evaluation of the molar movements following Pendulum and fixed appliances

Long-term evaluation of the molar movements following Pendulum and fixed appliances

Orthodontics Miniscrews to Correct an Anchorage Loss: Case Report

Avaliação das alterações dentoesqueléticas de jovens com má oclusão de Classe II tratados com aparelho distalizador First Class Modificado, utilizando modelos digitais e análise cefalométrica

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About