SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Akdeniz Diş Hekimliği Dergisi / 2022 / Cilt: 1 Sayı: 1

Comparison of Cephalometric and Dental Cast Measurements of Patients Treated with Single Lower Incisor Extraction and Non-extraction Orthodontic Treatment

Elçin ESENLİK
Esra YÜKSEL COŞKUN
Pages
6–13
Publication Date
2022-07-27
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Lower incisor extraction can be applied to avoid lower incisor protrusion.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: The aim of this retrospective study was to compare the treatment results of patients treated with non-extraction (NE) and single lower incisor extraction (SLIE) using cephalometric and dental cast analysis.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Methods: The lateral cephalometric radiographs and dental casts of 40 patients (20 patients of treated with Single Lower Incisor Extraction (SLIE), and 20 patients of treated with non-extraction (NE) were examined.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Lower incisor extraction can be applied to avoid lower incisor protrusion.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:single lower incisor extraction · Non-extraction orthodontic treatment · Bolton’s analysis.

Özet

Objective: The aim of this retrospective study was to compare the treatment results of patients treated with non-extraction (NE) and single lower incisor extraction (SLIE) using cephalometric and dental cast analysis. Methods: The lateral cephalometric radiographs and dental casts of 40 patients (20 patients of treated with Single Lower Incisor Extraction (SLIE), and 20 patients of treated with non-extraction (NE) were examined. The positions of the upper and lower incisors were examined cephalometrically; dental arch widths, arch lengths, Little Irregularity Index and Bolton Analysis were measured on the dental casts. Results: In the SLIE and NE group, the amounts of maxillary irregularity were 2.67 ± 0.30 (mm) and 3.07 ± 0.36 (mm), the amounts of mandibular irregularity were 7.11±0.27 (mm) and 3.29±0.46 (mm) respectively. Lower intercanine (3-3) width was significantly decreased in the SLIE group and the changes between the groups were statistically significant as well. In SLIE group, no statistically significant change was observed in the parameters of the upper and lower incisor measurements, while in the NE group, the upper incisor angle (1-NA˚) and the distance of the upper incisors to the N-A plane (1-NA (mm)) increased significantly (p<0.05). Conclusion: Successful dentoalveolar outcomes may be achieved by performing SLIE therapy as an alternative to NE applied to treat Class I patients with mandibular irregularity. Lower incisor extraction can be applied to avoid lower incisor protrusion.

🔖

Cite This Article

ESENLİK, E., COŞKUN, E. Y. (2022). Comparison of Cephalometric and Dental Cast Measurements of Patients Treated with Single Lower Incisor Extraction and Non-extraction Orthodontic Treatment. Akdeniz Diş Hekimliği Dergisi, Cilt: 1 Sayı: 1, 6–13. https://ajindex.com/articles/976233

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (20)

  1. Kokich VG, Shapiro PA. Lower incisor extraction in orthodontic treatment: four clinical reports. Angle Orthod 1984; 54(2):139-53
  2. Proffit WR, Fields HW Jr, Sarver DE. Contemporary orthodontics, 5th ed. St Louis: Mosby; 2013
  3. Ileri Z, Bascifti FA, Malkoc S, Ramoglu SI. Comparison of the outcomes of the lower incisor extraction, premolar extraction and non-extraction treatments. Eur J Orthod 2012; 34:681-5
  4. Nazir R, Amanat N, Rizvi KR. Pattern, prevalence and severity of malocclusion among university students. J Pak Dent Assoc 2013; 22:13-8
  5. Melo L, Ono Y, Takagi Y. Indicators of mandibular dental crowding in the mixed dentition. Pediatr Dent 2001; 23:118-22
  6. Giancotti A, Garino F, Mampieri G. Lower incisor extraction treatment with the Invisalign® technique: three case reports. JO 2015; 42:33-44
  7. Grob DJ. Extraction of a mandibular incisor in a Class I malocclusion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1995; 108:533-41
  8. Riedel RA, Little RM, Bui TD. Mandibular incisor extraction-Post retention evaluation of stability and relapse. Angle Orthod 1992; 62:103-16
  9. Valinoti JR. Mandibular incisor extraction therapy. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1994; 105:107-16
  10. Hasan MN, Sultana N, Hassan GS. Mandibular incisor extraction for management of class I malocclusion-A case report. Update Dent Coll J 2013; 3:54-7
  11. Bahreman AA. Lower incisor extraction in orthodontic treatment. Am J Orthod 1977; 72:560-7
  12. Dacre JT. The long term effects of one lower incisor extraction. Eur J Orthod 1985; 7:136-44
  13. Canut JA. Mandibular incisor extraction: indications and long-term evaluation. Eur J Orthod 1996; 18: 485-9
  14. Klein DJ. The mandibular central incisor, an extraction option. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1997; 111:253-9
  15. Hegarty DJ, Hegarty M. Is lower incisor extraction treatment a compromise? Dental update 1999; 26,117-22
  16. Hinkle F. Incisor extraction case report. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1987; 92: 94-7
  17. Barbosa VLT. Angle Class I malocclusion treated with lower incisor extraction. Dental press journal of orthodontics 2013; 18:150-8
  18. Prakash A, Tandur AP, Dungarwal N, Bhargava R. Mandibular incisor extraction case report. Virtual J Orthod 2011; 22
  19. Safavi SM, Namazi AH. Evaluation of mandibular incisor extraction treatment outcome in patients with Bolton discrepancy using peer assessment rating index. Journal of Dentistry, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran 2012; 9(1): 27-34
  20. Beycan K,