No abstract

No abstract

OBJECTIVE: Esthetic enhancement plays an important role in orthodontic treatment. This study was conducted on females as most girls have their growth spurt at a younger age than boys do, so their demand to facial esthetics, especially those who have residual growth of mandible producing class III effect, requires full understanding to smile features helping in diagnosis and treatment planning for maximum patient satisfaction. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study was conducted on 30 skeletal Class III and Class I female adults (18–30 years old) who were divided equally into two groups comprising 15 each. Two frontal digital photographs were taken for each subject, one at rest and the other in the posed smile position. Photographs were taken for each subject in the natural head position by a Canon EOS 1200 D camera set on a tripod at a distance of 1.5 m. The incisogingival height of the right maxillary central incisor was clinically measured using a vernier caliper to the nearest 0.1 mm. Photographs were uploaded on Photoshop software for standardization and then uploaded on the Digital Smile Design software (DSD) where the actual incisogingival height of the central incisor was used for automatic calibration. Esthetic components at rest and on smiling were measured for both groups; all linear variables were measured to the nearest 0.1 mm. RESULTS: Class III females tended to have wider smile widths, less gingival display, longer chin heights, shorter lower vertical dimensions, and a higher percentage of nonconsonant and flat smile arcs than Class I subjects. CONCLUSIONS: The components of the smile should be considered as a guide to help in planning and designing the mechanics during comprehensive orthodontic treatment.

The aim of the present study is compare between the effect of surgical corticotomy and LLLT on the periodontal health. methods: Orthodontic patients whom treatment necessitated maxillary 1 st premolar extraction followed by canine retraction, were recruited. Pre-intervention periodontal assessment was performed. At the day of premolar extraction, both interventions (corticotomy and LLLT) were randomly allocated to both sides of maxillary arch followed by canine retraction. Post-retraction periodontal assessment was done 6 months after start of canine retraction. Results:A statistical significant decrease by (0.29±0.57mm and 0.49± 0.75mm) was found in the gingival margin level of the maxillary lateral incisor on the corticotomy and Laser sides respectively. No statistical significant difference was found between both sides. Conclusions: Both interventions showed the same minor changes in the level of the gingival margin of maxillary lateral incisor.

No abstract