Evaluation of marginal alveolar bone in the anterior mandible with pretreatment and posttreatment computed tomography in nonextraction patients

Evaluation of maxillary buccal alveolar bone before and after orthodontic alignment without extractions: A cone beam computed tomographic study

“…Reduction of buccal alveolar bone following orthodontic treatment corroborates results reported in previous CT and CBCT studies. 7,11,13,19,20 Garlock et al 7 reported on average 1.12 mm of buccal bone recession at the mandibular central incisor, with high variability after nonextraction treatment with a selfligating appliance. Cattaneo et al 13 found 12-23% reduction of buccal bone thickness relative to 2PM following nonextraction orthodontic treatment with selfligating appliances.…”

“…Tipping and expansion have been reported 4,5,7,13 to cause apical migration of marginal buccal bone and reduction in buccal bone thickness. The results showed a correlation between the amount of expansion and the degree of bone reduction at 2PMs and mb1Ms.…”

“…1 However, sagittal expansion beyond the skeletal base boundaries may, according to animal 2,3 and human [4][5][6][7] studies, constitute a risk for developing bony dehiscence and gingival recession. Transverse expansion can be achieved by relieving the external muscle matrix, 8 by using buccal pressure with palatal devices, 1 and, more recently, using fixed appliances with broad archwires has been suggested.…”

“…Thus, orthodontic treatment with selfligating appliances would allow for greater dental expansion, provoke less incisor proclination, and require fewer extractions than would treatment with conventional appliances. 10 Nevertheless, cone beam computed tomographic (CBCT) studies 7,13 in nonextraction patients assessing the bone at the maxillary second premolars and at the mandibular incisors have failed to demonstrate that self-ligating appliances promote expansion with torque control and that teeth are followed by the alveolar bone. A more comprehensive study assessing the changes in the buccal bone in both the posterior and anterior regions of the maxilla has not yet been published.…”

Hueso Cortical en Sínfisis Mandibular de Sujetos de Clase I

“…El área bucal fue la de menor en tamaño, seguida de la lingual y la inferior. A pesar de que Garlock et al (2016), indicaron que existen variables que pueden influenciar en las variaciones de tamaño de cortical como la posición dentaria y el ancho de reborde, nuestros resultados mostraron consistencia en las mediciones presentadas. La estructura cortical depende también de condiciones fisiológicas normales, donde Wang et al (2016), realizando un estudio en modelo animal, señalaron que la deficiencia de testosterona en macacos machos influenciaría en la disminución de la estructura de hueso cortical y las consecuentes enfermedades de soporte dentario.…”