Anchorage reinforcement with a fixed functional appliance during protraction of the mandibular second molars into the first molar extraction sites

Chhibber, Aditya; Upadhyay, Madhur

doi:10.1016/j.ajodo.2015.02.029

Cited by 17 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…15 When space is created by pathological factors, such as odontogenic tumors or cysts, prosthodontic treatment is usually necessary to re-establish the occlusion. However, the present result strongly suggests that orthodontic treatment has a significant ability to reduce or completely close a large edentulous space 22 and remodel the alveolar bone affected by pathology. Space was required to correct the crowding and protrusion of the maxillary and mandibular incisors 23,24 and so the treatment plan was chosen to utilise the edentulous space created by the lesion.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 59%

An Angle Class I malocclusion with a paradental cyst

Miyamoto

Kanzaki

Amemiya

et al. 2019

Australasian Orthodontic Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

According to the WHO, a paradental cyst is classified as an odontogenic inflammatory lesion, showing a relative frequency of 0.9-4.7% in the world population. There are no identifiable reports of orthodontic treatment of patients who also present with a paradental cyst. The presenting patient was a Japanese female, aged 16 years and 10 months. The chief complaint was crowding and protrusion of the incisors. The magnitude of the overjet was +4.0 mm, overbite was +3.8 mm, and the intermolar relationship was Angle Class I. Pretreatment computed tomography identified a radiolucency extending from the root furcation to the apex of the mandibular left first molar, which was diagnosed as a paradental cyst. Orthodontic treatment was performed using lingual multi-bracket appliances and miniscrews following the extraction of the affected mandibular first molar, mandibular right first premolar and both maxillary first premolars. The paradental cyst was enucleated, and occlusal cusp-fossa relationships were maintained with complete space closure. This case is the first report of orthodontic treatment in association with the management of a paradental cyst.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 59%

An Angle Class I malocclusion with a paradental cyst

Miyamoto

Kanzaki

Amemiya

et al. 2019

Australasian Orthodontic Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Extraoral appliances (e.g., chincap, facemask, or headgear) and intraoral appliances (e.g., transpalatal arch, lingual holding arch, or Forsus) are alternatives for anchorage reinforcement during second molar protraction. [5] Without patient cooperation, TSADs are the best option to avoid anchorage loss. To pull the molars forward, these skeletal anchorage appliances are mostly placed on the side where molar protraction is required.…”

Section: Yesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[4] Furthermore, anchorage is critical, particularly in cases requiring prolonged treatment time, because it provides greater control of orthodontic mechanics to reduce unwanted tooth movement during space closure. [5]…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Molar space closure: To do or not to do?

Ratanasereeprasert

Weng

Yang

et al. 2021

APOS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Missing or compromised permanent molars can complicate orthodontic treatment planning and mechanics. Molar extraction should be considered in appropriate situations, but clinicians must decide between closing and regaining the edentulous space. Several factors should be taken into consideration to achieve appropriate molar space management, such as the need for space, asymmetry, periodontal status, sinus pneumatization, and the terminal molar position. Herein, three sample cases are reported to demonstrate the treatment options for molar space closure and maintenance with these factors taken into consideration during treatment planning. The understanding of mechanics played a crucial role in anchorage preparation and side effect prevention. If the third molar substitution was managed in advance and adequate space between the ramus and third molar was obtained via second molar protraction, the tooth spontaneously erupted in a favorable position without requiring further treatment. This case series can aid clinicians in molar space management. Regardless of whether the space is to be closed or regained, the treatment plan should conform to the patient’s expectations and improve occlusion with minimal side effects and treatment duration.

show abstract

“…[4][5][6][7][8] Molar protraction can be challenging for clinicians, but with the aid of temporary anchorage devices (TADs), molars can be more easily protracted to close the space. [9][10][11] When the patient has a third molar in the same quadrant as the missing tooth, it may be aligned along the posterior line of occlusion to replace the missing tooth. As the available space increases posteriorly following molar protraction, impacted third molars may spontaneously erupt and mesialize to attain posterior occlusion.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Alveolar bone changes after molar protraction in young adults with missing mandibular second premolars or first molars

Baik¹,

Jung²,

Jung³

et al. 2021

The Angle Orthodontist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives To assess the changes in alveolar bone of the mandibular second molars following molar protraction and investigate the factors associated with the alveolar bone changes. Materials and Methods Cone-beam computed tomography of 29 patients (mean age 22.0 ± 4.2 years) who had missing mandibular premolars or first molars and underwent molar protraction were reviewed. Alveolar bone level was measured as the distance from the cementoenamel junction at six points, buccal, lingual, mesiobuccal (MB), mesiolingual (ML), distobuccal (DB), and distolingual (DL), of the second molars at pretreatment (T0) and after molar protraction (T1). Factors associated with alveolar bone changes at the distal and mesial of the second molars were assessed. Results Mean alveolar bone changes ranged from −1.2 mm (bone apposition) to 0.8 mm (bone resorption). The presence of a third molar impaction at T0 (P < .001), third molar angulation at T0 (P < .001), and Nolla's stage of third molar at T0 (P = .005) were significantly associated with alveolar bone level changes distal to the second molars. Treatment duration (P = .028) was significantly associated with alveolar bone level changes mesial to the second molar. Conclusions Patients with impacted third molars, third molars at an earlier stage of development, and mesially angulated third molars at pretreatment may have less alveolar bone resorption distal to the second molars following protraction. Patients with increased treatment time may have reduced alveolar bone resorption mesial to the second molars.

show abstract

Anchorage reinforcement with a fixed functional appliance during protraction of the mandibular second molars into the first molar extraction sites

Cited by 17 publications

References 26 publications

An Angle Class I malocclusion with a paradental cyst

An Angle Class I malocclusion with a paradental cyst

Molar space closure: To do or not to do?

Alveolar bone changes after molar protraction in young adults with missing mandibular second premolars or first molars

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About