Morphological characteristics influencing the orthodontic extraction strategies for Angle's class II division 1 malocclusions

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：Yongwen Guo ; Xianglong Han ; Hui Xu ; Dongqing Ai ; Huan Zeng…
• 关键词：Angle's class II division 1 malocclusion ; Morphologic characteristics ; Extraction treatment
• 刊名：Progress in Orthodontics
• 出版年：2014
• 出版时间：December 2014
• 年：2014
• 卷：15
• 期：1
• 全文大小：288 KB
• 参考文献：1. Hahn, GW (1944) Orthodontics; its objectives, past and present. Am J Orthod Oral Surg 42: pp. 17-21
  2. Tweed, CH (1944) Indications for the extraction of teeth in orthodontic procedure. Am J Orthod Oral Surg 42: pp. 22-45
  3. Case, CS (1964) The question of extraction in orthodontia. Am J Orthod 50: pp. 660-91 CrossRef
  4. Brandt, S, Safirstein, GR (1975) Different extractions for different malocclusions. Am J Orthod 68: pp. 15-41 CrossRef
  5. Weintraub, JA, Vig, PS, Brown, C, Kowalski, CJ (1989) The prevalence of orthodontic extractions. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 96: pp. 462-6 CrossRef
  6. Castro, N (1974) Second-premolar extraction in clinical practice. Am J Orthod 65: pp. 115-37 CrossRef
  7. Klein, DJ (1997) The mandibular central incisor, an extraction option. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 111: pp. 253-9 CrossRef
  8. Aras, A (2000) Class II, correction with the modified sagittal appliance and maxillary second molarextraction. Angle Orthod 70: pp. 332-8
  9. Chung, KR, Cho, JH, Kim, SH, Kook, YA, Cozzani, M (2007) Unusual extraction treatment in class II division 1 using C-orthodontic mini-implants. Angle Orthod 77: pp. 155-66 CrossRef
  10. Burrow, SJ (2008) To extract or not to extract: a diagnostic decision, not a marketing decision. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 133: pp. 341-2 CrossRef
  11. Ribarevski, R, Vig, P, Vig, KD, Weyant, R, O’Brien, K (1996) Consistency of orthodontic extraction decisions. Eur J Orthod 18: pp. 77-80 CrossRef
  12. Ackerman, JL, Proffit, WR (1997) Soft tissue limitations in orthodontics: treatment planning guidelines. Angle Orthod 67: pp. 327-36
  13. Al-Nimri, KS (2006) The effects of commonly prescribed premolar extraction sequences on the curvature of the upper and lower lips. Angle Orthod 76: pp. 52-8
  14. Katsaros, C, Ripplinger, B, Hogel, A, Berg, R (1996) The influence of extraction versus non-extraction orthodontic treatment on the soft tissue profile. J Orofac Orthop 57: pp. 354-65 CrossRef
  15. Wholley, CJ, Woods, MG (2003) The effects of commonly prescribed premolar extraction sequences on the curvature of the upper and lower lips. Angle Orthod 73: pp. 386-95
  16. Andrews, LF (1972) The six keys to normal occlusion. Am J Orthod 62: pp. 296-309 CrossRef
  17. Nelson, B, Hansen, K, Hagg, U (1999) Overjet reduction and molar correction in fixed appliance treatment of class II, division 1, malocclusions: sagittal and vertical components. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 115: pp. 13-23 CrossRef
  18. Al-Nimri, KS (2003) Changes in mandibular incisor position in class II division 1 malocclusion treated with premolar extractions. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 124: pp. 708-13 CrossRef
  19. Janson, G, Maria, FR, Barros, SE, Freitas, MR, Henriques, JF (2006) Orthodontic treatment time in 2- and 4-premolar-extraction protocols. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 129: pp. 666-71 CrossRef
  20. Janson, G, Brambilla Ada, C, Henriques, JF, Freitas, MR, Neves, LS (2004) Class II treatment success rate in 2- and 4-premolar extraction protocols. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 125: pp. 472-9 CrossRef
  21. Janson, G, Janson, M, Nakamura, A, Freitas, MR, Henriques, JF, Pinzan, A (2008) Influence of cephalometric charact
• 刊物主题：Dentistry;
• 出版者：Springer Berlin Heidelberg
• ISSN：2196-1042

文摘

Background Extraction has now been accepted widely in various malocclusions including Angle's class II division 1. However, the levels of scientific evidence in orthodontic treatment planning have been weak, and it is unlikely to systematically provide a rationale and consistent basis in decisions of extraction. This study was retrospectively designed to investigate the initial morphologic characteristics of class II division 1 subjects involving four different extraction strategies, to determine the relevant influential factors when choosing extraction strategies with the most commonly used mechanics and the principle of simplicity in orthodontic treatment based on cases diagnosed and treated by an experienced orthodontist. Methods One hundred and ten samples of Angle's class II division 1 malocclusion with good facial and occlusal outcomes after orthodontic treatment were selected and divided into four groups according to different extraction patterns. For each case, pretreatment models and the lateral radiographs were analyzed. Significant variables of models and craniofacial structures of each group were identified by comparing the measurements using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) at a significance level of P--.05. Then, binary logistic regression analysis was used and a regression equation was established to quantify the correlations among the significant variables and their contributions to the extraction decisions. Results Molar relationship, lower anterior crowding, anterior Bolton index, and anterior overjet measured from models, as well as ANS-Xi-Pm, NBa-PtGn, Li-NsPog', U1-NPog and L1-NPog measured from lateral radiographs were found to be statistically significant. Binary logistic regression analysis revealed that lower anterior crowding, molar relationship, and growth pattern were the three most relevant influential factors with a declining impact contributing to the extraction decisions for Angle's class II division 1 malocclusions. Conclusions Angle's class II division 1 malocclusions exhibit various morphological characteristics. Orthodontists should comprehensively consider the reciprocal impact of multiple factors when choosing different extraction strategies for Angle's class II division 1 malocclusions.