Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.4041/kjod.2018.48.4.224

Comparison of treatment effects between four premolar extraction and total arch distalization using the modified C-palatal plate  

Jo, Sung Youn (Private Practice)
Bayome, Mohamed (Department of Dentistry, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea)
Park, Justyn (School of Dentistry, University California San Francisco)
Lim, Hee Jin (Department of Orthodontics, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea)
Kook, Yoon-Ah (Department of Orthodontics, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea)
Han, Seong Ho (Division of Orthodontics, Department of Dentistry, St. Vincent's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea)
Publication Information
The korean journal of orthodontics / v.48, no.4, 2018 , pp. 224-235 More about this Journal
Abstract
Objective: The purpose of this study was to compare the skeletal, dental, and soft-tissue treatment effects of nonextraction therapy using the modified C-palatal plate (MCPP) to those of premolar extraction (PE) treatment in adult patients with Class II malocclusion. Methods: Pretreatment and posttreatment lateral cephalographs of 40 adult patients with Class II malocclusion were retrospectively analyzed. The MCPP group comprised 20 patients treated with total arch distalization of the maxillary arch while the PE group comprised 20 patients treated with four PE. Fifty-eight linear and angular measurements were analyzed to assess the changes before and after treatment. Descriptive statistics, paired t-test, and multivariate analysis of variance were performed to evaluate the treatment effects within and between the two groups. Results: The MCPP group presented 3.4 mm of retraction, 1.0 mm of extrusion, and $7.3^{\circ}$ lingual inclination of the maxillary central incisor. In comparison, the PE group displayed greater amount of maxillary central incisor retraction and retroclination, mandibular incisor retraction, and upper lip retraction (5.3 mm, $14.8^{\circ}$, 5.1 mm, and 2.0 mm, respectively; p < 0.001 for all). In addition, the MCPP group showed 4.0 mm of distalization and 1.3 mm of intrusion with $2.9^{\circ}$ distal tipping of the maxillary first molars. Conclusions: These findings suggest the MCPP is an effective distalization appliance in the maxillary arch. The amount of incisor retraction, however, was significantly higher in the PE group. Therefore, four PE may be recommended when greater improvement of incisor position and soft-tissue profile is required.
Keywords
Orthodontic implant; Adult treatment; Extraction vs. nonextraction; Modified C-palatal plate;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 3  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 Jung MH. A comparison of second premolar extraction and mini-implant total arch distalization with interproximal stripping. Angle Orthod 2013; 83:680-5.   DOI
2 Sheridan JJ. Air-rotor stripping update. J Clin Orthod 1987;21:781-8.
3 Sar C, Kaya B, Ozsoy O, Ozcirpici AA. Comparison of two implant-supported molar distalization systems. Angle Orthod 2013;83:460-7.   DOI
4 Wilmes B, Nanda R, Nienkemper M, Ludwig B, Drescher D. Correction of upper-arch asymmetries using the Mesial-Distalslider. J Clin Orthod 2013; 47:648-55.
5 Papadopoulos MA. Orthodontic treatment of Class II malocclusion with miniscrew implants. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2008;134:604.e1-16.
6 Kircelli BH, Pektas ZO, Kircelli C. Maxillary molar distalization with a bone-anchored pendulum appliance. Angle Orthod 2006;76:650-9.
7 Escobar SA, Tellez PA, Moncada CA, Villegas CA, Latorre CM, Oberti G. Distalization of maxillary molars with the bone-supported pendulum: a clinical study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2007; 131:545-9.   DOI
8 Kook YA, Kim SH, Chung KR. A modified palatal anchorage plate for simple and efficient distalization. J Clin Orthod 2010;44:719-30.
9 Lee SK. Comparison of treatment effect between the MPAP and buccally miniscrew groups in nonextractioncase [Master's thesis]. Seoul: The Catholic University of Korea; 2016.
10 Park CO, Sa'aed NL, Bayome M, Park JH, Kook YA, Park YS, et al. Comparison of treatment effects between the modified C-palatal plate and cervical pull headgear for total arch distalization in adults. Korean J Orthod 2017;47:375-83.   DOI
11 Grave K, Townsend G. Cervical vertebral maturation as a predictor of the adolescent growth spurt. Aust Orthod J 2003;19:25-32.
12 Oh YH, Park HS, Kwon TG. Treatment effects of microimplant-aided sliding mechanics on distal retraction of posterior teeth. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2011;139:470-81.   DOI
13 Tweed CH. Indications for the extraction of teeth in orthodontic procedure. Am J Orthod Oral Surg 1944-1945;42:22-45.
14 Basciftci FA, Usumez S. Effects of extraction and nonextraction treatment on class I and class II subjects. Angle Orthod 2003;73:36-42.
15 Saelens NA, De Smit AA. Therapeutic changes in extraction versus non-extraction orthodontic treatment. Eur J Orthod 1998;20:225-36.   DOI
16 Piao Y, Kim SJ, Yu HS, Cha JY, Baik HS. Five-year investigation of a large orthodontic patient population at a dental hospital in South Korea. Korean J Orthod 2016;46:137-45.   DOI
17 Fritz U, Diedrich P, Wiechmann D. Lingual technique--patients' characteristics, motivation and acceptance. Interpretation of a retrospective survey. J Orofac Orthop 2002;63:227-33.   DOI
18 Steyn CL, du Preez RJ, Harris AM. Differential premolar extractions. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1997;112:480-6.   DOI
19 Duran GS, Görgülü S, Dindaroğlu F. Three-dimensional analysis of tooth movements after palatal miniscrew-supported molar distalization. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2016;150:188-97.   DOI
20 Cardaropoli D, Gaveglio L, Abou-Arraj RV. Orthodontic movement and periodontal bone defects: Rationale, timing, and clinical implications. Semin Orthod 2014;20:177-87.   DOI
21 Peterson LJ, Ellis EE, Hupp JR, Tucker MR. Contemporary oral and maxillofacial surgery. 3rd ed. St. Louis, MO: Mosby; 1998. p. 259-63.
22 Crossman IG, Reed RT. Long term results of premolar extractions in orthodontic treatment. Br J Orthod 1978;5:61-6.   DOI
23 Garib DG, Bressane LB, Janson G, Gribel BF. Stability of extraction space closure. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2016;149:24-30.   DOI
24 Cope JB. Temporary anchorage devices in orthodontics: A paradigm shift. Sem Orthod 2005;11:3-9.   DOI
25 Choi YJ, Lee JS, Cha JY, Park YC. Total distalization of the maxillary arch in a patient with skeletal Class II malocclusion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2011;139:823-33.   DOI
26 Mah SJ, Kim JE, Ahn EJ, Nam JH, Kim JY, Kang YG. Analysis of midpalatal miniscrew-assisted maxillary molar distalization patterns with simultaneous use of fixed appliances: A preliminary study. Korean J Orthod 2016;46:55-61.   DOI
27 Kinzinger GS, Gülden N, Yildizhan F, Diedrich PR. Efficiency of a skeletonized distal jet appliance supported by miniscrew anchorage for non-compliance maxillary molar distalization. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2009;136:578-86.   DOI
28 Bechtold TE, Kim JW, Choi TH, Park YC, Lee KJ. Distalization pattern of the maxillary arch depending on the number of orthodontic miniscrews. Angle Orthod 2013;83:266-73.   DOI
29 Sugawara J, Kanzaki R, Takahashi I, Nagasaka H, Nanda R. Distal movement of maxillary mol ars in nongrowing patients with the skeletal ancho rage system. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2006; 129:723-33.   DOI