Atypical extraction of maxillary central incisors

Janson, Guilherme; Valarelli, Danilo Pinelli; Valarelli, Fabrício Pinelli; Freitas, Marcos Roberto de; Pinzan, Arnaldo

doi:10.1016/j.ajodo.2008.08.042

Cited by 16 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Moreover, growth and dental extrusion are present in all three dimensions of other adjacent regions and according to some studies, these would likely occur in the third and fourth decades of life, causing a future demand for replacing the osseointegrated implant (Iseri & Solow, 1996). Another difficulty would lie in controlling the gingival contour in the implant region without the existence of shadows, as this is an aesthetically demanding area (Janson et al, 2010). In this case, the option of extracting the maxillary central incisors was a treatment alternative for Class II malocclusion, because the inappropriate position of tooth #21 did not allow its traction.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…When maxillary central incisors are compromised by extensive decay (beyond the cementoenamel junction), fracture, ankylosis, or inappropriate position, their atypical extraction is considered an acceptable alternative (Janson et al, 2010). In this case, several factors should be considered, such as: facial biotype, tooth size and shape, type of occlusion, gap to be closed and root length (Sabri, 2002).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Atypical Extraction of Maxillary Central Incisor for the Correction of Angle Class II Malocclusion

Lima¹,

Cericato

Pithon

et al. 2019

Int. J. Odontostomat.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

LIMA, A. P. B.; CERICATO, G. O.; PITHON, M. M.; FRANCO, A.; HERVAL, A. M. & PARANHOS, L. R. Atypical extraction of maxillary central incisor for the correction of Angle Class II malocclusion. Int. J. Odontostomat., 13(3):292-298, 2019.ABSTRACT: This case describes the treatment of Class II malocclusion in a patient missing one of the maxillary central incisors due to traumatic impaction. The treatment approach consisted in the extraction of the remaining maxillary central incisor, followed by diastema closure and re-anatomization of lateral incisors into central incisors. The results obtained were considered satisfactory concerning occlusal, aesthetic and functional aspects. This therapeutic approach may be used as an alternative for similar cases.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Atypical Extraction of Maxillary Central Incisor for the Correction of Angle Class II Malocclusion

Lima¹,

Cericato

Pithon

et al. 2019

Int. J. Odontostomat.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Gingival esthetics in the area of tooth 22 could be improved by finishing folds and arch twists (root buccal torque) [28], the root would be directed toward the buccal side, and root displacement followed by the alveolar bone would make the gingiva thinner, improving smile esthetics. However, parents refused such procedure, considering that the result presented exceeded their expectations.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Orthodontic Protocol Using Mini-Implant for Class II Treatment in Patient with Special Needs

Ferreira¹,

Lima

Paula

et al. 2016

Case Reports in Dentistry

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Improving facial and dental appearance and social interaction are the main factors for special needs (SN) patients to seek orthodontic treatment. The cooperation of SN patients and their parents is crucial for treatment success. Objective. To show through a case report the satisfactory results, both functional and esthetic, in patients with intellectual disability, congenital nystagmus, and severe scoliosis. Materials Used. Pendulum device with mini-implants as anchorage unit. Results. Improvement of facial and dental esthetics, correction of Class II malocclusion, and no root resorption shown in the radiographic follow-up. Conclusion. Knowing the limitations of SN patients, having a trained team, motivating and counting on the cooperation of parents and patients, and employing quick and low-cost orthodontic therapy have been shown to be the essential factors for treatment success.

show abstract

“…However, results which are almost indistinguishable from normal appearance can be produced, but indications for this selected approach (Table 2) must be present and attention to detail throughout treatment must be exercised. 1,5,8,17,18 The recognised disadvantages of this treatment approach include: increased treatment complexity, requirement for integrated interdisciplinary management, increased functional load on the small lateral incisor root and a high risk of anterior space reopening. The latter is a particular problem and necessitates long-term orthodontic retention.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%