Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0030-4220(54)90320-5 | DOI Listing |
Cochrane Database Syst Rev
April 2024
Cochrane Oral Health, Division of Dentistry, School of Medical Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester, UK.
Background: Prominent lower front teeth (Class III malocclusion) may be due to jaw or tooth position or both. The upper jaw (maxilla) can be too far back or the lower jaw (mandible) too far forward; the upper front teeth (incisors) may be tipped back or the lower front teeth tipped forwards. Orthodontic treatment uses different types of braces (appliances) fitted inside or outside the mouth (or both) and fixed to the teeth.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFInt J Clin Pediatr Dent
January 2023
Department of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry, SCB Dental College and Hospital, Cuttack, Odisha, India.
Context: Orthopedic correction of skeletal class III malocclusion in a growing patient is crucial as it can circumvent future surgical procedures.
Aims: The aim of the study is to evaluate the dental and skeletal effects of early orthodontic intervention of developing class III malocclusion.
Settings And Design: A final sample of 38 children in the age-group of 6-14 years having skeletal class III malocclusion was selected.
Clin Case Rep
June 2023
Department of Preventive Dental Sciences, College of Dentistry Majmaah University Al-Majmaah Saudi Arabia.
With conventional mechanics to protract the upper posterior teeth for correcting Class III molar relationships, such as intra-arch mechanics, face mask reverse-pull headgear protraction, and interarch Class III elastics, there are some adverse effects, including diminished patient compliance, the possibility of losing anchorage, and extrusion of upper molars and lower incisors with counterclockwise rotation of the occlusal plane. Protraction force should be directed through the center of resistance of the upper posterior teeth to prevent these side effects.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFAm J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop
May 2023
Department of Orthodontics, Ingá University Center Uningá, Maringá, Paraná, Brazil.
Introduction: The objective of this study was to compare the long-term cephalometric stability after successful therapy of nonextraction Class II malocclusion with elastics and with headgear.
Methods: The sample comprised 43 patients with Class II malocclusion and was divided into 2 groups. The elastic group (EG) consisted of 20 patients treated with fixed appliances associated with Class II elastics, and the headgear group (HG) consisted of 23 patients treated with fixed appliances and extraoral headgear.
Children (Basel)
February 2022
Department of Biomedical, Surgical and Dental Sciences, University of Milan, 20122 Milan, Italy.
The present study was carried out to evaluate the benefits from one-phase Class II Early Treatment (ET) using extraoral forces and functional appliances but without intermaxillary forces and eventual lower leeway space preservation compared to two-phase Class II Late Treatment (LT) with the need for extractions and full fixed appliances as well as lower incisor proclination. The ET group ( = 239, 115 M, 124 F, mean age 10.6 ± 1.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFEnter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!