No abstract

BackgroundPain is among the most cited negative effects of orthodontic treatment. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs seem to be an effective option for minimizing this but can have adverse effects on tooth movement owing to their ability to block prostaglandin synthesis. Acetaminophen has been suggested as the analgesic of choice during orthodontic treatment as it showed no effect on orthodontic tooth movement in previous animal studies. The purpose of this study was to compare the effects of ibuprofen and acetaminophen on the prostaglandin E2 (PGE2) levels of the gingival crevicular fluid (GCF) during orthodontic tooth movement in human subjects.MethodsA total of 42 patients (mean age 18 ± 4.5 years) were randomly divided into three equal groups: ibuprofen, acetaminophen, and control groups. Maxillary canines were distalized with 150 g of force delivered by NiTi coil springs. GCF samples were obtained before (baseline) and after spring activation at 24, 48, and 168 h. The PGE2 content of the GCF was determined using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay.ResultsPGE2 levels in all groups increased significantly by 24 and 48 h of force application and decreased to baseline levels by 168 h. No significant difference was found between the acetaminophen and control groups at any time point. There was a significant decrease in PGE2 levels in the ibuprofen group at 24 and 48 h when compared to the other two groups.ConclusionsAcetaminophen showed no significant effect on prostaglandin synthesis and may be the safe choice compared to ibuprofen for relieving pain associated with orthodontic tooth movement.

No abstract

Assoc iate Pro fesso r, Dept. of O rth odo nti cs a nd De ntofac ia l O rth o pedi cs, SDM De nt a l In stitut e, Dh a rwad, Ka rn ata ka, In di a. K. M. Ke luskar MDS, Professor, He ad, De pt. of Orth odo nti cs a nd De ntofac ial O rthopedi cs, KLE De nta l Institute, Be lga um , Ka rn a tak a, In dia.

Context The cranial base and variations in its morphology affect the anterior-posterior positioning of jaws causing changes in the glenoid fossa and condylar position. Aims To evaluate the condylar position in patients with different skeletal sagittal malocclusion patterns. Materials and Methods Pretreatment lateral cephalometric radiographs of 112 subjects (both males and females) were categorized into three classes (Class I, Class II, Class III) based on their ANB angulation and studied for N-S-Ar (saddle angle), S-Ar-Go (articular angle), S-Ar (posterior cranial base length). Statistical Analysis Shapiro-Wilk test was done to check for normality of the distribution of values. Groups were evaluated using parametric tests (one-way ANOVA). Significance for all tests was predetermined as P < 0.05. Results N-S-Ar and S-Ar-Go and also S-Ar did not vary significantly in all the three classes. N-S-Ar and S-Ar-Go angles have shown a significant negative correlation in all the three classes. Conclusions There is no significant difference in condylar position in different skeletal malocclusion patterns. N-S-Ar and S-Ar-Go angles show a negative correlation in any skeletal malocclusion pattern.