medigraphic.com
ISSN 1870-199X (Print)
Órgano oficial de la Facultad de Odontología, UNAM

2007, Number 2

<< Back Next >>

Rev Odont Mex 2007; 11 (2)

Orthodontic compensation in a class II division I patient. Clinical case

Torres UM, González BM

Language: Spanish
References: 12
Page: 91-102
PDF size: 1113.87 Kb.


ABSTRACT

The objective of an orthodontic compensation or camouflage is to treat the skeletal discrepancies avoiding orthognatic surgery. Dental extractions allows us to obtain a correct dental relation even when an incorrect relation of skeletal Class II or III exist. Clinical Case: A 19 year old patient with Class II, skeletal division 1 diagnosis, which is decided to make an orthodontic compensation by extracting the first upper premolars.


REFERENCES

  1. Proffit RW. Ortodoncia teoría y práctica. Edit. Mosby/Doyma Libros, 2da edición. Madrid España 1994: 607-645.

  2. Kirjavainen M, Kirjavainen T. Maxillary expansion in class II correction with orthopedic cervical headgear. A posteroanterior cephalometric study. Angle Ortodontist 2003; 73(3): 281-285.

  3. Bench RW, Gugino CF, Hilgers JJ. Bioprogressive therapy. Part 5. J Clin Orthod 1978; 12: 48-69.

  4. Haas AJ. Palatal expansion: just the beginning of dentofacial orthopedics. Am J Orthod 1970; 57: 219-255.

  5. Kirjavainen M, Kirjavainen T, Hurmerinta k, Haavikko K. Orthopedic cervical headgear with an expanded inner bow in class II correction. Angle Orthod 2000; 70: 317-325.

  6. Singh GD, Thind BS. Effects of the hewdgear-activator Teuscher appliance in the treatment of class II division 1 malocclusion; a geometric morphometric study. Orthod Craniofacial Res 2003; 6: 88-95.

  7. Birkebaek L, Melsen B, Terp S. A laminographic study of the alterations in the temporomandibular joint following activator treatment. Eur J Orthod 1984; 6: 257-66.

  8. Demner LM, Kolotokov AP, Basharova ON. Cephalometric analysis of changes arising during treatment of prognathism. Stomatologica (Moskva). 1961; 48: 57-61.

  9. Vargervik K, Harvold EP. Response to activator treatment in class II malocclusions. Am J Orthod 1985; 88: 242-51.

  10. Björk A. The principle of the Andresen method of orthodontic treatment: a discussion based on cephalometric X-ray analysis of treated cases. Am J Orthod 1951; 37: 437-58.

  11. Wieslander L, Lagerstrom L. The effect of activator treatment on class II malocclusions. Am J Orthod 1979; 75: 20-6.

  12. Pancherz H. A cephalometric analysis of skeletal and dental changes contributing to class II correction in activator treatment. Am J Orthod 1984; 85: 125-34.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com