Objectives Due to the constant battle regarding the controversial topic of orthodontic extraction, this study aims to assess the changes in vertical dimensions of patients treated with premolar extractions compared with nonextraction orthodontic patients. Materials and Methods A sample of 60 borderline patients were recruited and divided into extraction and nonextraction groups. Eleven pretreatment cephalometric measurements were recorded using WebCeph and patients were followed-up until the completion of treatment. Statistical Analysis Intragroup and intergroup comparisons were made using paired t-test and two-sample independent t-test, respectively. The joint significance of differences was measured using F-tests. Results The intragroup comparison revealed that in the extraction group, the vertical dimension was significantly increased posttreatment for four cephalometric measurements, that is, mandibular plane angle (p < 0.05), palatal plane angle (p < 0.05), Frankfort mandibular plane angle (p < 0.05), and y-axis (p < 0.05). In the comparison of the posttreatment values of both groups, the mean differences of the posttreatment values for sella nasion (SN)-gonion (Go)-gnathion (Gn) angle (p = 0.008), the total anterior (p = 0.050), and lower anterior facial heights (AFH; p = 0.011) were significantly higher. At the same time, the Jarabak ratio was significantly (p = 0.006) lower in the extraction group than in the nonextraction group. Conclusion The increase in vertical dimension is significantly higher in the extraction group than in the nonextraction group which indicates a significant impact of orthodontic extraction on the vertical dimensions.

Objective This study aimed to compare dentoskeletal changes in skeletal class-II malocclusion with removable twin block appliance and fixed AdvanSync2 appliance. Materials and Methods A prospective randomized clinical trial was conducted over a span of 1 year at AFID at Rawalpindi. Thirty patients with skeletal class-II malocclusion, 16 males (53.3%) and 14 females (46.6%), were randomly selected and divided in two equal groups (15 each) to be treated with either fixed functional appliances (FFAs) or with removable functional appliances (RFAs). Out of 30 patients, 15 between cervical vertebral maturation (CVM) stages of 2 and 3 were treated with RFA (twin block appliances) and remaining 15 between CVM stages of 4 and 5 were treated with FFA (AdvanSync2 appliances). Pretreatment (T1) and posttreatment (T2), angular variable, and linear variable were measured to compare the dentoskeletal effects between the two groups. Statitical Analysis Paired sample t-test was used to assess significant difference between variables at T1 (Pre-treatment) and T2 (Post-treatment) stage for both RFA and FFA group. Comparison among the RFA and FFA group was made using non-parametric Mann-Whitney U Test. IBM SPSS version 25.0 was used for evaluation. Results No significant difference was found in angular variables between the RFA and FFA groups (p > 0.05) with the exception of linear variables. Sella-posterior nasal spine (S-PNS) length significantly increased and Jarabak's ratio significantly decreased for FFA group (p = 0.010 and 0.045, respectively), when compared with RFA group. Conclusion Both the appliances, twin block (RFA) and AdvanSync2 (FFA), are effective for correction of skeletal class-II malocclusion. Both the appliances produced similar effects in the sagittal plane but for better vertical control twin block should be the appliance of choice. AdvanSync2 appliance could be preferred over twin block appliance when dentoalveolar and slight retrusive effect on the maxilla is desired especially for individuals in postpubertal growth spurt.

No abstract

Objective: To check the variation of space available in the mandibular dental arch using different tools, i.e., Vernier caliper and brass wire with a millimeter ruler. Study Design: Comparative cross-sectional study. Place and Duration of Study: Department of Orthodontics, Armed Forces Institute of Dentistry (AFID), Rawalpindi Pakistan, from Sep to Dec 2019. Methodology: Seventy-five dental casts of patients, with an age range between 12-25 years were included in the study. The variation of the space available using two different measuring tools (Vernier calliper and brass wire with millimetre ruler) in the mandibular arch was determined by the same observer to assess random and systematic errors. The examiner recorded the measurements, and then the same examiner repeated the measurements after ten days by taking two readings each using the blinding technique to minimize bias. Random and systematic errors were analyzed with the use of two methods. Results: Systematic errors were found to be significant with brass wire with millimetre ruler method only (p-value=0.02). For random errors, the Vernier calliper can be considered a better method to measure reproducibility and repeatability. However, brass wire with a millimetre ruler method can be considered better for measuring repeatability than reproducibility since the value to measure random errors was less than 1mm but in the upper limits (p-value=0.091). Conclusion: In the current study, it is concluded that the Vernier calliper is more precise in measuring the readings in orthodontics for arch space measurement than that of brass wire with a millimetre ruler. However, brass wire

Objective: The research was carried out to compare the dimensions of commercially available preformed archwires with natural arch forms of Pakistani subjects. Methods: An observational study that lasted for 6 months was conducted at AFID, Rawalpindi. Fifty-two maxillary and mandibular dental casts of orthodontically untreated subjects (26 males and 26 females) were evaluated to obtain arch dimensions at the canines and first molar levels with the help of digital Vernier calipers. Bracket-archwire assembly was constructed to accurately measure widths from bracket-slot (BS) points at both the canine and molar levels, in an attempt to mimic clinical archwire-bracket interface. Canine and molar depths were also recorded for accurate estimation of the digitized archwire widths at the aforementioned levels. Results: The archwires evaluated for maxilla were significantly wider at canines (42.16 ±1.84mm, p = 0.000) and first molars (58.45 ± 1.33mm, p = 0.014) compared to the canine and molar dimensions of the dental casts obtained from subjects (37.61 ± 3.75mm, 55.68 ± 4.05mm respectively). For mandible, statistically significant differences were found at the canine level where archwires (34.75 ± 1.66mm, p = 0.000) exhibited greater dimensions than mean intercanine widths (29.33 ± 3.35mm) of the subjects. Conclusion: At present, commercially obtainable preformed archwires are inconsistent with the diverse arch forms manifested in a group of subjects with almost ideal occlusion. Therefore; utilization of these archwires may create unwarranted wider dimensions of the arch form, especially in the intercanine region which can influence post treatment retention, stability and facial esthetics. Continuous..