PubMed · 14634177
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
H R Sukhia. 2003. Aesthetic horizontal reference line.. https://doi.org/10.1093/ortho%2F30.4.353-a
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
INTRODUCTION: Maxillary molar distalization is a common treatment approach for patients with Class II malocclusions who do not require extractions. Despite the many advantages of pendulum appliances, the maxillary incisors and premolars tend to shift mesially as the maxillary molars move distally. The purpose of this study was to investigate anchorage loss in patients treated with palatal osseointegrated implants combined with pendulum springs. METHODS: Pretreatment and posttreatment lateral cephalometric films of 30 consecutively treated patients were examined. One group (n = 15) had been treated with conventional pendulum appliances, and the other group (n = 15) was treated with palatal osseointegrated implants combined with pendulum springs. RESULTS: In the pendulum group, significant distal tipping of the maxillary first molars and mesial tipping of the maxillary premolars were noted. Distalization of the maxillary first molars, mesialization of the maxillary first premolars, and proclination of the maxillary left central incisor were significant in the linear measurements. In the implant group, the distal tipping of the maxillary first molars and first premolars and the increases in SNGoGn, FMA, Na Me, and Na ANS were significant. Intergroup comparisons showed that changes in the maxillary first premolars, maxillary central incisors, and vertical measurements were significant. CONCLUSIONS: The use of palatal osseointegrated implants is reliable and provides absolute anchorage.
The method we use to collect, store, and share dental records of our patients is rapidly becoming digital. Many programs have been designed to run on a single computer or local network to handle various tasks, including cephalometric analysis and orthodontic treatment planning. Selecting a system can be complex, requiring consideration of capital investment costs and subscription or update fees, as well as the ease (or difficulty) of installing the system and learning to use it. cephX (cephX, Inc, Las Vegas, Nev) is an Internet-based digital data storage and retrieval service for cephalometric analyses, photographic storage, and online data sharing. Users pay for services as they are used, eliminating the need to buy new hardware or software.
OBJECTIVES: To compare pairs of silhouettes generated from presurgical and 5-year postsurgical cephalometric radiographs to evaluate whether orthodontists, oral surgeons, and lay persons perceive changes in profile resulting from orthodontics and mandibular advancement surgical treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A survey-based method of data collection was used to evaluate 15 pairs of silhouettes. These silhouettes included 1 control pair and 14 surgically treated pairs representing mandibular advancements ranging from 0.11 mm to 10.13 mm. Collected data were analyzed to determine whether changes can be perceived and whether these changes were esthetically pleasing. RESULTS: The control silhouette pair was identified by 104 of 127 evaluators. For the 14 surgical treated silhouette pairs, the vast majority of evaluators (N = 127; 53 orthodontists, 32 oral surgeons, and 42 lay persons) were able to identify changes in profile and individual features. At least one group of evaluators was able to perceive significant (P < .05) improvement in the visual analog scale (VAS) score for all these silhouette pairs, except for the pair with 10.13 mm of mandibular advancement. This silhouette pair, which represented the largest mandibular advancement, was perceived to have a significant (P < .05) worsening in the VAS score by the lay person group. There were significant differences among the groups of evaluators. Esthetic improvement in profile was perceived for 13 of 14 surgically treated silhouette pairs. CONCLUSION: In some cases, orthodontists, oral surgeons, and lay persons perceived changes in profile differently.