An evaluation of the pendulum distalizingappliance

Joseph, Abu A; Butchart, Chris J.

doi:10.1053/od.2000.5901

Cited by 69 publications

(34 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Moreover, the results of this study should be considered with caution since they cannot be generalized because of the sample size of convenience sample used 28 . However, similar results to this study have been found in the literature 4,15,16,19 . So, the low sample size could not be considerate as a great bias of this research.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 94%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Dental changes in Class II patients treated with Pendex appliance: a prospective study

Silva¹,

Barbosa²,

Oliveira³

et al. 2016

Arch Health Invest

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ResumoO objetivo deste estudo foi avaliar as alterações dentárias na maxila e as possíveis alterações verticais decorrentes da utilização do Pendex como método de tratamento ortodôntico para distalização dos molares superiores. Uma amostra por conveniência de 10 pacientes de ambos os sexos (9,3 -28,8 anos; média: 15,3 anos), com necessidade de tratamento ortodôntico, foi selecionada para participação desse estudo na Faculdade de Odontologia da Universidade Paulista -FOUNIP. Duas radiografias em norma lateral foram obtidas de cada paciente, uma ao início do tratamento (T1) e outra após a distalização dos molares dos primeiros molares superiores (T2). Os cefalogramas foram traçados e mensurados pelo mesmo operador e os dados de T2 e T1 foram comparados entre si, para cada paciente. As seguintes medidas cefalométricas foram avaliadas: distância de PTV ao 1 o molar superior (A6-PTV), ao 1 o pré molar superior (A4-PTV) e ao incisivo central superior (A1-PTV), inclinação do 1 o molar superior (A6.PP), inclinação do 1 o pré molar superior (A4.PP) e a inclinação do incisivo central superior (A1.PP) em relação ao plano palatino (PP), ângulo interincisivo (A1.B1); altura facial inferior (AFI); eixo facial (EF); altura facial total (AFT). Os dados obtidos foram submetidos ao teste "t" para amostras pareadas (5%). Os valores médios e desvios-padrão obtidos para cada medida (T2-T1) foram: A6-PTV= -4,9±6,5; A4-PTV=1,2±4,1; A1-PTV= -1,4±7,3; A6.PP=9,4±7,7; A4.PP=-3,6±6,7; A1.PP=9,4±7,7; A1.B1=-4,9±13,7; AFI=1,7±2,1; EF=-1,0±2,4; AFT=1,0±2,7. Os resultados mostraram significância estatística para: A6-PTV (p=0,041); A6.PP (p=0,004) e AFI (p=0,031) (p>0,05). Pôde-se concluir que Pendex mostrou-se eficiente na correção da Classe II e que seus efeitos foram limitados às estruturas dentoalveolares.Descritores: Má Oclusão de Angle Classe II; Ortodontia; Cefalometria Craniana. AbstractThe objective of this study was to evaluate the dental changes in the maxilla and the possible facial vertical alterations of patients after using a Pendex appliance for maxillary molar distalization during their orthodontic treatment. A convenience sample of ten patients of both genders (9.3 to 28.8 years old; mean: 15.3 years) with a need of orthodontics treatment was selected for participation in this study at Paulista University Dental School -FOUNIP. Two lateral cephalometric radiographs were obtained for each patient, one at the beginning (T1) and the other after the distalization of the maxillary first molars (T2). The cephalograms were traced and measured by a calibrated operator and the data at T2 and T1 were compared between then for each patient. The following cephalometric measurements were taken: distance from PTV to maxillary first molar (A6-PTV), to maxillary first premolar (A4-PTV) and to maxillary incisor (A1-PTV); maxillary first molar tipping (A6.PTV), maxillary first premolar (A4.PTV) and maxillary incisor (A1.PTV) to palatal plane (PP); interincisal angle (A1.B1); lower facial height (LFH); facial axis (FA) and total facial height (...

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 94%

“…In order to avoid this undesirable movement, Hilgers 13 added an expansion screw to it, thus originating Pendex. Some advantages of Pendex using include shorter treatment time, constant load on molars and it does not depend on patient cooperation during treatment [15][16][17] . For this reason, it is widely recommended by orthodontists.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Dental changes in Class II patients treated with Pendex appliance: a prospective study

Silva¹,

Barbosa²,

Oliveira³

et al. 2016

Arch Health Invest

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…22 This has been correlated with the amount of distalization. 22,23 In spite of this, large tipping movements can be corrected with maxillary molar uprighting bends. Byloff et al 24 suggested the use of 10Њ to 15Њ molar uprighting bends.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Maxillary Molar Distalization with Noncompliance Intramaxillary Appliances in Class II Malocclusion

Antonarakis

Kiliaridis

2008

The Angle Orthodontist

103

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To use published data to evaluate quantitatively the dental effects of noncompliance intramaxillary appliances in individuals with Class II malocclusion. Materials and Methods: A literature search was carried out identifing 13 prospective or retrospective clinical studies matching inclusion criteria. Only appliances with conventional anchorage designs were considered for the review. The data provided in these publications were grouped and analyzed in terms of molar distalization, tipping and vertical movements, and incisor and premolar mesialization, tipping, and vertical movements. Results: Maxillary first molars showed distal crown movement and tipping greater than the mesial crown movement and tipping shown by incisors and premolars. Vertical movements of incisors and premolars were in general extrusive, but molars were intrusive or extrusive, depending on the study and the type of appliance used. Appliances that acted palatally seemed to display a smaller distal tipping movement, as well as smaller incisor and premolar mesial tipping movements, when compared with those that acted buccally. Friction-free appliances, namely the pendulum, produced a large amount of mesiodistal movement and tipping, if no therapeutic uprighting activation was applied. Conclusions: Noncompliance intramaxillary molar distalization appliances all act by distalizing molars with a concomitant and unavoidable loss of anchorage, as revealed by incisor and premolar mesial movement. Buccal acting and palatal acting appliances demonstrate almost similar results, with palatal acting appliances showing less tipping. Friction-free palatal acting appliances appear to produce better molar distalizing effects, but with a concomitant notable loss of anchorage.

show abstract

“…International the patients who attend for orthodontic treatment. Class literature (28)(29)(30)(31)(32)(33)(34)(35)(36) reports a loss of anchorage between 15 II malocclusion is not a single clinical anomaly. It can and 65%; a molar tipping between -2.2°and 16.0°; and a occur in various forms.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Role of the Friction Free Distalize Appliance (2FDA)Pat in the Molar Distalization: Photoelastic Analysis and Alkaline-Phosphatase (ALP) Activity on First Molar and Bicuspid

D’Attilio

Tecco

Traini

et al. 2007

Int J Immunopathol Pharmacol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Maxillary molar distalization is an increasingly popular option for the resolution of Class II malocclusions. This study describes the effects of one particular molar distalizing appliance, the Friction Free Distalize Appliance (2FDA), in a sample of 20 consecutively treated and growing patients to verify the osteoblastic activity in the compression and traction sites of both the molars and the bicuspids when used as the anchorage teeth. The 2FDA appliances were constructed utilizing a Nickel Titanium open coil spring of 200 gr force in order to distalize the maxillary first molar. The reaction force was controlled utilizing the principle of low/free friction. The results show that the resin around the root of the bicuspid did not discolour at all, which indicates an absence of a force load. On the other hand, on the molar, the resin around the root of the molar became discoloured due to the fact that an orthodontic force was involved with the tooth. To better understand whether the quantity offorce that reached the tooth was able to produce osteoblastic recruitment in the sites of tension of the molar and the bicuspid, we quantified an enzyme, the alkaline phosphatase (ALP), present. This measurement allowed us to verify a regular increase of the ALP on the site of molar traction. We also elaborated a mathematical model to evaluate the quantity of force of reaction that produces the device on the bicuspid. Such force results as being 8.34 grams which equals half the pressure of the capillaries of the parodontal ligament (18 grams). The 2FDA appliance compares favourably with other intra-oral distalization devices for the resolution of patients with Class II malocclusions, and is the only distalizing appliance that does not determine osteoclastic/osteoblastic recruitment on the "anchorage tooth".Class II malocclusion cases constitute a heterogeneous teeth, proinclination ofmaxillary incisors and produce some group of patients that represents a significant portion of all distal tipping ofthe maxillary molars. (24-27). International the patients who attend for orthodontic treatment. Class literature (28-36) reports a loss of anchorage between 15 II malocclusion is not a single clinical anomaly. It can and 65%; a molar tipping between -2.2°and 16.0°; and a occur in various forms. In non-extraction Class II adult bicuspid tipping between _4.3°and 2.4°. patients, maxillary molar distalization may be used to To try to minimize the adverse effects of the molar correct the molar relationship and to alleviate crowding distalization with a non-compliance device, we recently in the maxillary arch. A variety of techniques for molar developed a new distalize appliance named Friction Free distalization have been suggested, including those that Distalize Appliance (2FDAPal). It has been proven that this require patient compliance (1-10) and those that reduce new device can distalize maxillary molars with very few the need for patient co-operation. In a survey by Sinclair or, in several cases, without the disadvantages ofthe ot...

show abstract

An evaluation of the pendulum distalizingappliance

Cited by 69 publications

References 4 publications

Dental changes in Class II patients treated with Pendex appliance: a prospective study

Dental changes in Class II patients treated with Pendex appliance: a prospective study

Maxillary Molar Distalization with Noncompliance Intramaxillary Appliances in Class II Malocclusion

Role of the Friction Free Distalize Appliance (2FDA)Pat in the Molar Distalization: Photoelastic Analysis and Alkaline-Phosphatase (ALP) Activity on First Molar and Bicuspid

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About