Orthodontic Research - Braces, Retainers, Treatment

Orthodontic Research Today is a free monthly online journal that collates and summarizes the latest research about Orthodontic, including details on braces, retainers, treatment.


Orthodontic Research Today

Home

View Latest Issue

Information About Orthodontic

Books on Orthodontic

Advertising in Research Today

View Other Research Today Publications



Occlusal morphology 1 year after orthodontic and surgical-orthodontic therapy.

Dellavia C, Ghislanzoni LT, Peretta R

Department of Human Morphology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy. claudia.dellavia@unimi.it

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate morphologic characteristics of occlusion (contact points, contact areas, and frequency of contact) in clinically successful patients 1 year after orthodontic and surgical-orthodontic therapy followed by passive retention. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-two orthodontic and 18 surgical-orthodontic patients were analyzed. All patients were treated with standard edgewise technique by the same orthodontist. Contact points and areas were evaluated using a new method of digital image analysis of occlusal impressions. Polivinylsyloxan impressions were taken, scanned, and turned into gray-scale images. The physic relationship of light absorbance through the polivinylsyloxan for known thickness was calculated to determine contact areas (less than 50 microm of thickness) and near contact areas (less than 350 microm of thickness). RESULTS: The contact area was significantly larger in the orthodontic than in the surgical-orthodontic patients (Student's t-test, P < .05). The surgical-orthodontic group had significantly fewer contact points than the orthodontic group only at 150 microm of thickness. In both groups of patients, the first molar had the largest contact surface. Occlusal support was distributed mainly in the posterior regions with an important role involving the first molars. CONCLUSION: Surgical-orthodontic patients appear to have smaller contact surfaces and fewer contact points than orthodontic patients do. However, there were no differences in the number of teeth in contact with opposing teeth.

Published 15 January 2008 in Angle Orthod, 78(1): 25-31.
Full-text of this article is available online (may require subscription).

Place a permanent text-link or advertisement here for just US$15.

© 2005-2008 Orthodontic Research Today. All Rights Reserved.



Orthodontic Research Today Archive:

Volume 1 (2005)
  Issue 1 (March)
  Issue 2 (April)
  Issue 3 (May)
  Issue 4 (June)
  Issue 5 (July)
  Issue 6 (August)
  Issue 7 (September)
  Issue 8 (October)
  Issue 9 (November)
  Issue 10 (December)

Volume 2 (2006)
  Issue 1 (January)
  Issue 2 (February)
  Issue 3 (March)
  Issue 4 (April)
  Issue 5 (May)
  Issue 6 (June)
  Issue 7 (July)
  Issue 8 (August)
  Issue 9 (September)
  Issue 10 (October)
  Issue 11 (November)
  Issue 12 (December)

Volume 3 (2007)
  Issue 1 (January)
  Issue 2 (February)
  Issue 3 (March)
  Issue 4 (April)
  Issue 5 (May)
  Issue 6 (June)
  Issue 7 (July)
  Issue 8 (August)
  Issue 9 (September)
  Issue 10 (October)
  Issue 11 (November)
  Issue 12 (December)

Volume 4 (2008)
  Issue 1 (January)
  Issue 2 (February)
  Issue 3 (March)
  Issue 4 (April)
  Issue 5 (May)
  Issue 6 (June)
  Issue 7 (July)
  Issue 8 (August)



Orthodontic Books

Mosby's Orthodontic Review

Mosby's Orthodontic Review