2010
DOI: 10.1590/s2176-94512010000100011
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparação entre os resultados oclusais e os tempos de tratamento da má oclusão de Classe II por meio da utilização do aparelho Pendulum e das extrações de dois pré-molares superiores

Abstract: Objectives: The purpose of this study was to compare the occlusal outcomes and the treatment time of Class II malocclusion with the Pendulum appliance and with two maxillary premolar extractions. Methods: For this, 48 Class II malocclusion patients were selected and divided into two groups according to the treatment protocol: group 1 consisted of dental study casts and initial cephalograms of 22 patients treated with the Pendulum appliance, with an initial mean age of 14.44 years and group 2, comprised of dent… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 19 publications
(63 reference statements)
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Conventional intraoral distalizers take an average of 4–7 months to achieve molar Class I [23], although the literature imposes that the protocol of extraction of two upper premolars is faster than distalization to correct Class II [23]. The use of the pendulum device supported in mini-implants showed efficiency in correcting this malocclusion in a reduced time with satisfactory occlusal results and interesting biological cost, considering the limitations of the patient exposed.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Conventional intraoral distalizers take an average of 4–7 months to achieve molar Class I [23], although the literature imposes that the protocol of extraction of two upper premolars is faster than distalization to correct Class II [23]. The use of the pendulum device supported in mini-implants showed efficiency in correcting this malocclusion in a reduced time with satisfactory occlusal results and interesting biological cost, considering the limitations of the patient exposed.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%