Introduction: Protrusive anterior teeth in class II division 1 malocclusion cause the facial profile to become convex with anterior teeth retraction is expected to correct protrusive teeth and improve facial profile. The purpose of this study was to determine whether there was a change in lip position after incisor retraction in the treatment of class II division 1 malocclusion with extraction of maxillary premolars. This study was carried out on lateral cephalometry before and after treatment in 25 patients with class II division 1 malocclusion to evaluate changes in lip position with the Burstone method. To assess the results of treatment, statistical analysis was performed using t test and the Wilcoxon test. Result: The results of the comparison test of the facial profile of the upper lip and lower lip before and after treatment showed a p-value of 0.001 (p-value 0.001 < 0.05) meaning that there were significant differences in the position of the upper lip and lower lip before and after treatment using Burstone method. Conclusion: There is a change in facial profile after retraction of the anterior teeth in the treatment of class II division 1 malocclusion with extraction of the maxillary premolars.

Treatment of Class II division 1 malocclusion mostly required two maxillary first premolars in order to provide spaces for maxillary anterior teeth retraction. Anterior teeth retraction may cause loss of anchorage. This study aimed at evaluating the effects of anterior teeth retraction towards first maxillary molar loss of anchorage. It was conducted by observing any mesial drifting of first maxillary molar occurred in patients with Class II division 1 malocclusion undergoing treatment with two first maxillary premolar extractions. Material consists of 25 cephalometric films of patients prior to and after orthodontic treatment using Edgewise technique. Cephalometric measurement conducted included S vertical-M1 and FHP-M1. Statistic test used was pairing T-test, showing that p < 0.05 for paired data showed non-significant alteration in S vertical-M1 and FHP-M1 measurement prior to and after treatment. It can be concluded that mesial drifting of maxillary first molars did not occur in orthodontic treatment for Class II division 1.

Introduction: A common reason for people to obtain orthodontic treatment is a misalignment between the upper dental midline and the midline of the face. The process of orthodontic treatment is considered to affect a patient's visual perception before and after the treatment, as well as their satisfaction with treatment, possibly due to the information received during treatment.  This study aimed to analyze this visual perception of dental midline deviation differences between orthodontically completely treated and untreated patients. Methods: This was a cross-sectional survey of 90 orthodontic patients, 49 completely treated patients who had completed orthodontic treatment and 41 untreated patients who had not started treatment. Patients were asked to complete a Google Form questionnaire for evaluating 12 intraoral smiling photos with midline deviation and a Likert scale. Bivariate statistical analysis with the Mann Whitney test was carried out to see differences in visual perceptions between two groups. Results: Completely treated patients perceive a 0-1 mm (LCN/L photos) midline deviation of the upper teeth as attractive, while untreated patients perceive a 0-2 mm (LCN photos) and 0-3 mm (L photos) deviation as attractive. The statistical analysis revealed a significant difference in patient perception between completely treated and untreated groups, with a p-value of 0.001 (p<0.05) and a mean score of 36.5 and 53.0, respectively. Conclusion: There are differences in visual perception between orthodontically completely treated and untreated patients. The group of completely treated patients is more sensitive to detecting a midline deviation of the upper teeth..Keywords : Upper dental midline deviation, visual perception, completely treated orthodontic patients, untreated orthodontic patients