Effectiveness and stability of anterior open bite correction using temporary skeletal anchorage: comparison to surgical outcomes

Disponível somente no TrabalhosFeitos
  • Páginas : 35 (8645 palavras )
  • Download(s) : 0
  • Publicado : 11 de agosto de 2012
Ler documento completo
Amostra do texto
EFFECTIVENESS AND STABILITY OF ANTERIOR OPEN BITE CORRECTION USING TEMPORARY SKELETAL ANCHORAGE: COMPARISON TO SURGICAL OUTCOMES

by J. Turner Hull

A thesis submitted to the faculty of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in the Department of Orthodontics.

Chapel Hill 2009

Approved by: Advisor:Reader: Reader: Reader: J.F. Camilla Tulloch Ceib Phillips Timothy Turvey Nicole Scheffler

© 2008 J. Turner Hull, DDS ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

ii

ABSTRACT J. TURNER HULL: Effectiveness and Stability of Anterior Open Bite Correction Using Temporary Skeletal Anchorage: Comparison to Surgical Outcomes (Under the direction of Dr. Camilla Tulloch)

The skeletal and dental changes that occurfollowing the intrusion of maxillary posterior teeth with temporary skeletal anchorage (TSA) and the stability of these changes over time were assessed in twelve patients (1 male, 11 females) with anterior open bite. A comparative sample of patients treated with maxillary osteotomy was frequency matched based on age and gender. Lateral cephalograms were obtained before treatment/surgery, at the endof treatment/post-surgery, and at least 6 months following the completion of treatment. All pretreatment measurements except overbite were similar, on average, between the two treatment groups. Positive overbite was achieved for all patients treated with TSA’s (Pre-tx OB x = -1.0mm, Post-tx OB x = 2.7mm). Both groups showed a similarly small average   change during the follow-up time period.Overbite correction via intrusion of maxillary posterior teeth using TADs appears to be an effective and stable treatment modality.

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF TABLES .....................................................................................................................v LIST OF FIGURES................................................................................................................. vi

SECTION I. LITERATURE REVIEW ........................................................................................1 II. MANUSCRIPT ......................................................................................................13 A. Introduction ................................................................................................13 B.Material and Methods ................................................................................15 C. Results ........................................................................................................18 D. Discussion ..................................................................................................24 E. Conclusions................................................................................................27 F. References ..................................................................................................28

iv

LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Treatment Timepoints ............................................................................................16 2. Sample Demographics...........................................................................................18 3. Skeletal cephalometric values for the sample at T1, T2, and T3 .......................................................................................................19 4. Dental cephalometric values for the sample at T1, T2, and T3 .......................................................................................................20

v

LIST OF FIGURESFigure 1. Cephalometric digitization landmarks ...................................................................17 2. Change in overbite for individual TSA patients ....................................................21 3. Change in overbite for individual Surgery patients ...............................................21 4. Change in vertical maxillary molar position for individual TSA patients...
tracking img