Cephalometric evaluation of effect of activator treatment on incisor torque in patients with distal malocclusion
Abstract
Since skeletal correction is too difficult to achieve in the treatment of distal malocclusions, tooth movements gain actuality. The aim of our study was to advance the impact of functional appliances on the incisor movement. The study was carried out with 19 distal malocclusion patients (11 girls and 8 boys) which were treated by the twin block. The results of this study have shown that the twin block causes retrusion of upper incisors and protrusion of lower incisors. The rotrusion of mandibular incisors is more marked than maxillary incisor retrusion.
About the Authors
Z. H. Novruzov
Azerbaijan Medical University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
R. G. Alieva
Azerbaijan Medical University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
G. K. Zeynalova
Azerbaijan Medical University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
References
1. Altenburger E., Ingervall B. The initial effects of the treatment of Class II, division 1 malocclusions with the Van Beek activator compared with the effects of the Herren activator and an activatorheadgear combination. European Journal of Orthodontics, 1998, 20, 389-397.
2. Bishara S. E., Ziaja R. R. Functional appliances: a review. Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop. 1989, 95, 250-258.
3. Chen J. Y., Will L. A., Niederman R. Analysis of efficacy of functional appliances on mandibular growth, Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop. 2002, 122, 470-476.
4. Clark W.J. The Twin-block technique: a functional orthopedic appliance system, Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop. 1988, 93, 1-18.
5. Cura N., Sarac M., Öztürk Y., Sürmeli N. Orthodontic and orthopedic effects of Activator, Activator-Hg combination and Bass appliances: a comparative study. Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop. 1996, 110, 36-45.
6. De Almeida M. R., Henriques J.F., Ursi W. Comparative study of the Fränkel (FR-2) and bionator appliances in the treatment of Class II malocclusion. Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop., 2002, 121, 458-466.
7. Jena A. K., Duggal R., Parkash H. Skeletal and dentoalveolar effects of Twin-block and bionator appliances in the treatment of Class II malocclusion: A comparative study, Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop. 2006, 130, 594-602.
8. Lund D. I. and Sandler P. J. The effects of Twin-Blocks: A prospective controlled study, Am.J. Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop. 1998, 113, 104-10.
9. Nelson C., Harkness M., Herbison P. Mandibular changes during functional appliance treatment, Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop. 1993, 104, 153-161.
10. Ruf S., Baltromejus S., Pancherz H. Effective condylar growth and chin position changes in activator treatment: a cephalometric roentgenographic study. Angle Orthodontist, 2001, 71, 4-11.
11. Rabie A. B., Hagg U. Factors regulating condylar growth. Am.J. Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop. 2002, 122, 401-409.
12. Sidlauskas A. The effects of the twin-block appliance treatment on the skeletal and dentoalveolar changes in Class II Division 1 malocclusion, Medicina, 2005, 41, 5.
13. Toth L. R., McNamara J. A. Treatment effects produced by the Twin-block appliance of Frankel compared with an untreated Class II sample, Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial. Orthop. 1999, 116, 597-609.
14. Trenouth. Cephalometric evaluation of the Twin-block appliance in the treatment of Class II Division 1 malocclusion with matched normative growth data, Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop., 2000, 117, 54-9.
15. Vargervik K., Harvold E. P. Response to Activator Treatment in Class II Malocclusion, American Journal of Orthodontics, 1985, 88, 241-51.
Review
For citations:
Novruzov Z.H., Alieva R.G., Zeynalova G.K. Cephalometric evaluation of effect of activator treatment on incisor torque in patients with distal malocclusion. Medical alphabet. 2017;1(1):20-22. (In Russ.)
Views:
283
Email this article 