The korean journal of orthodontics (대한치과교정학회지)

The Korean Association Of Orthodontists (대한치과교정학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Smile esthetics: Evaluation of long-term changes in the transverse dimension

  • Akyalcin, Sercan (Department of Orthodontics, Tufts University School of Dental Medicine) ;
  • Misner, Kenner ;
  • English, Jeryl D. (Department of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, University of Texas Health Science Center) ;
  • Alexander, Wick G. (Department of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, University of Texas Health Science Center) ;
  • Alexander, J. Moody ;
  • Gallerano, Ron (Department of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, University of Texas Health Science Center)
  • Received : 2016.01.27
  • Accepted : 2016.07.07
  • Published : 2017.03.25
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective: To analyze the long-term changes in maxillary arch widths and buccal corridor ratios in orthodontic patients treated with and without premolar extractions. Methods: The study included 53 patients who were divided into the extraction (n = 28) and nonextraction (n = 25) groups. These patients had complete orthodontic records from the pretreatment (T1), posttreatment (T2), and postretention (T3) periods. Their mean retention and postretention times were 4 years 2 months and 17 years 8 months, respectively. Dental models and smiling photographs from all three periods were digitized to compare the changes in three dental arch width measurements and three buccal corridor ratios over time between the extraction and nonextraction groups. Data were analyzed using analysis of variance tests. Post-hoc multiple comparisons were made using Bonferroni correction. Results: Soft-tissue extension during smiling increased with age in both groups. The maximum dental width to smile width ratio (MDW/SW) also showed a favorable increase with treatment in both groups (p < 0.05), and remained virtually stable at T3 (p > 0.05). According to the MDW/SW ratio, the mean difference in the buccal corridor space of the two groups was $2.4{\pm}0.2%$ at T3. Additionally, no significant group ${\times}$ time interaction was found for any of the buccal corridor ratios studied. Conclusions: Premolar extractions did not negatively affect transverse maxillary arch widths and buccal corridor ratios. The long-term outcome of orthodontic treatment was comparable between the study groups.

Keywords

References

  1. Ioi H, Nakata S, Counts AL. Effects of buccal corridors on smile esthetics in Japanese. Angle Orthod 2009;79:628-33. https://doi.org/10.2319/080708-410.1
  2. Martin AJ, Buschang PH, Boley JC, Taylor RW, McKinney TW. The impact of buccal corridors on smile attractiveness. Eur J Orthod 2007;29:530-7. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjm063
  3. Zange SE, Ramos AL, Cuoghi OA, de Mendonca MR, Suguino R. Perceptions of laypersons and orthodontists regarding the buccal corridor in long- and short-face individuals. Angle Orthod 2011;81:86-90. https://doi.org/10.2319/031210-145.1
  4. Chang CA, Fields HW Jr, Beck FM, Springer NC, Firestone AR, Rosenstiel S, et al. Smile esthetics from patients' perspectives for faces of varying attractiveness. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2011;140:e171-80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2011.03.022
  5. Parekh SM, Fields HW, Beck M, Rosenstiel S. Attractiveness of variations in the smile arc and buccal corridor space as judged by orthodontists and laymen. Angle Orthod 2006;76:557-63.
  6. Ioi H, Kang S, Shimomura T, Kim SS, Park SB, Son WS, et al. Effects of buccal corridors on smile esthetics in Japanese and Korean orthodontists and orthodontic patients. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2012;142:459-65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2012.05.011
  7. Ghafari JG. Emerging paradigms in orthodonticsan essay. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1997;111:573-80. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-5406(97)70294-4
  8. Spahl TJ. Premolar extractions and smile esthetics. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2003;124: 16A-17A;author reply 17A.
  9. Johnson DK, Smith RJ. Smile esthetics after orthodontic treatment with and without extraction of four first premolars. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1995;108:162-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-5406(95)70079-X
  10. Kim E, Gianelly AA. Extraction vs nonextraction: arch widths and smile esthetics. Angle Orthod 2003;73:354-8.
  11. Gianelly AA. Arch width after extraction and nonextraction treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2003;123:25-8. https://doi.org/10.1067/mod.2003.57
  12. Yang IH, Nahm DS, Baek SH. Which hard and soft tissue factors relate with the amount of buccal corridor space during smiling? Angle Orthod 2008;78:5-11. https://doi.org/10.2319/120906-502.1
  13. Akyalcin S, Erdinc AE, Dincer B, Nanda RS. Do long-term changes in relative maxillary arch width affect buccal-corridor ratios in extraction and nonextraction treatment? Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2011;139:356-61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2009.05.036
  14. Meyer AH, Woods MG, Manton DJ. Maxillary arch width and buccal corridor changes with orthodontic treatment. Part 1: differences between premolar extraction and nonextraction treatment outcomes. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2014;145:207-16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2013.10.017
  15. Janson G, Branco NC, Fernandes TM, Sathler R, Garib D, Lauris JR. Influence of orthodontic treatment, midline position, buccal corridor and smile arc on smile attractiveness. Angle Orthod 2011;81:153-61. https://doi.org/10.2319/040710-195.1
  16. Krishnan V, Daniel ST, Lazar D, Asok A. Characterization of posed smile by using visual analog scale, smile arc, buccal corridor measures, and modified smile index. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2008;133:515-23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.04.046
  17. Sarver DM, Ackerman MB. Dynamic smile visualization and quantification: part 1. Evolution of the concept and dynamic records for smile capture. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2003;124:4-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-5406(03)00306-8
  18. Sarver DM, Ackerman MB. Dynamic smile visualization and quantification: part 2. Smile analysis and treatment strategies. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2003;124:116-27. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-5406(03)00307-X
  19. Dahlberg G. Statistical methods for medical and biological students. London, UK: Allen and Unwin Publishing; 1940. p.122-32.
  20. Bishara SE, Cummins DM, Jakobsen JR. The morphologic basis for the extraction decision in Class II, division 1 malocclusions: a comparative study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1995;107: 129-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-5406(95)70127-3
  21. Saelens NA, De Smit AA. Therapeutic changes in extraction versus non-extraction orthodontic treatment. Eur J Orthod 1998;20:225-36. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/20.3.225
  22. Francisconi MF, Janson G, Freitas KM, Oliveira RC, Oliveira RC, Freitas MR, et al. Overjet, overbite, and anterior crowding relapses in extraction and nonextraction patients, and their correlations. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2014;146:67-72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2014.04.012
  23. Maulik C, Nanda R. Dynamic smile analysis in young adults. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2007;132:307-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2005.11.037

Cited by

  1. Clinical effectiveness of orthodontic treatment on smile esthetics: a systematic review vol.11, pp.None, 2017, https://doi.org/10.2147/ccide.s189708
  2. Smile outcome comparison of Invisalign and traditional fixed-appliance treatment: A case-control study vol.157, pp.3, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2019.03.030
  3. Smile attractiveness in cases treated with self‐ligating and conventional appliances with and without rapid maxillary expansion vol.23, pp.4, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1111/ocr.12383