medigraphic.com
ISSN 1608-8921 (Print)

2012, Number 3

<< Back Next >>

Gaceta Médica Espirituana 2012; 14 (3)

Cephalometric changes in patients with mandibular retrognatism treated with Truax corrector II

Rodríguez SK, Pérez GLM, de la Rosa CY, León CO

Language: Spanish
References: 13
Page:
PDF size: 231.42 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Background: The functional orthopedics of the maxillaries is effective in the treatment in the mandibular retrognatism and this can be checked by the means of the cephalometric studies. Objective: To describe the cephalometric modifications in patients with mandibular retrognatism when using Truax corrector II. Mehtodology: A transversal studied was carried out including 12 children between 7-10 years old with mandibular retrognatism in the Provincial Dental Clinic of Sancti SpÃritus city between December 2009-2010. The evolved variables related to cephalometric measures of the skeletal tissue, soft and dent alveolar. The comparison measures test was used for samples and the ranges with signs of Wilcoxon. Results: There were outstanding modifications in the mandibular position measures, maxillomandibular relation, facial convexity, inferior facial height, facial inferior, facial depth and mandibular length. There was a slight modification in the relation of lower and upper incisive with the basal bone and significant changes in the soft facial angle and labial outline with evidence in the transformation managed by the use of the appliance. Conclusion: The totality of patients showed a satisfactory evolution in the cephalometric variables studied. The most significant changes were the skeletal structures and the soft outline.


REFERENCES

  1. Moss M, Salentijn L. The primary role of funtional matrices in facial growth. Am J Orthod. 1969 Jun;55(6):566-77.Available from: http://preview.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=The%20primary%20role%20of%20funtional%20matrices %20in%20facial%20growth.%20Am%20J%20Orthod%201969

  2. Petrovic AG. Teoría del servosistema. En Ortopedia dentofacial con aparatos funcionales. Madrid: Harcourt Brace; 1998p.13-63.

  3. Rodríguez López JA, Casa Araujo A, Gurrola Martínez B, Ramírez Mendoza J. Longitud mandibular en pacientes clase II con bionator. Rev Latinoamericana de Ortodoncia y Odontoped. 2006; 44(1): 1-7. Disponible en: http://www.ortodoncia.ws/publicaciones/2006/art10.asp

  4. Truax L. Truax Corrector. A new functional appliance to correct class II and class III maloclusions. Rochester : Tru Tain Laboratories; 1996.

  5. Rodríguez Siles K, Pérez García LM, De la Rosa Cabrera Y. Modificaciones morfológicas en pacientes con retrognatismo mandibular tratados con el Truax Corrector II. Gac Méd Espirit. 2012:14(1).Disponible en: http://bvs.sld.cu/revistas/gme/pub/vol.14.%281%29_03/vol.14.1.03.pdf

  6. Novoa Fernández M, De la Rosa Cabrera Y, Pérez García LM. Modificaciones cefalométricas del Corrector ortopédico tipo II en pacientes clase II/1 de Angle y adaquia. Gac Méd Espirit. 2009; 11(3).Disponible en: http://bvs.sld.cu/revistas/gme/pub/vol.11.%283%29_02/resumen.html

  7. Pérez García LM, Saez Luna Mayra, Castillo Hernández R, Soto Cantero L, Grau Avalo R. Cambios cefalométricos con el uso del activador de Klammt en diferentes magnitudes de protrusión mandibular. Rev. Cubana Estomatol. 2003May-ago; 40(2). Disponible en: http://scielo.sld.cu/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S00345072003000200002 &lng=es&nrm=iso&tlng=es

  8. Candemil MM, Wilhelm RS. Estudo do crescimento e deslocamento anterior da mandíbula no tratamento da má-olusão de classe II, primeira divisão (Angle).J. bras. ortodon. ortop. facial. 2005 Mar-abr; 10(56):166-177.Disponible en: http://bases.bireme.br/cgi-bin/wxislind.exe/iah/online/?IsisScript=iah/iah.xis&src=google&base=BBO&lang=p&nextAction=lnk&exprSearch=28349 &indexSearch=ID

  9. Kinzinger G, Kober C, Diedrich P. Topography and morphology of the mandibular condyle during fixed functional orthopedic treatment --a magnetic resonance imaging study. J Orofac Orthop. 2007 Mar;68(2):124-47. Available from: http://www.springerlink.com/content/d2r834j713xq0183/

  10. Dolce C, McGorray SP, Brazeau L, King GJ, Wheeler TT. Timing of Class II treatment: skeletal changes comparing 1-phase and 2-phase treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2007 Oct; 132(4):481-9. Available from: http://www.ajodo.org/article/S0889-5406%2807%2900498-2/abstract

  11. Siqueira DF, de Almeira RR, Janson G, Brandão AG, Coelho Filho CM. Dentoskeletal and soft-tissue changes with cervical headgear and mandibular protraction appliance therapy in the treatment of Class II malocclusions. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2007 Apr; 131(4):447.e21-30. Available from: http://www.ajodo.org/article/S0889- 5406%2806%2901602-7/abstract

  12. Schaefer AT, McNamara JA Jr, Franchi L, Baccetti T. A cephalometric comparison of treatment with the Twin-block and stainless steel crown Herbst appliances followed by fixed appliance therapy. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2004 Jul;126(1):7-15. Available from: http://www.ajodo.org/article/S0889-5406%2804%2900204-5/abstract

  13. Gebeile-Chauty S, Archer JA, Lautrou A, Aknin JJ. Interceptive treatment with the DAC appliance: structural analysis. Orthod Fr. 2007 Dec; 78(4):283-94. Available from: http://www.orthodfr.org/index.php?option=com_article& ;access=doi&doi=10.1051/orthodfr:2007036&Itemid=129




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com