Cargando…
Comparison of dentoskeletal and soft tissue effects of Class II malocclusion treatment with Jones Jig appliance and with maxillary first premolar extractions
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the cephalometric changes in Class II division 1 malocclusion patients treated with Jones Jig appliance or with maxillary first premolar extractions. METHODS: The sample consisted of 88 lateral cephalograms of 44 patients, divided into two groups. Grou...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Dental Press International
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6526763/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31116288 http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/2177-6709.24.2.056-065.oar |
_version_ | 1783419951273476096 |
---|---|
author | Pupulim, Daniela Cubas Henriques, José Fernando Castanha Janson, Guilherme Henriques, Fernanda Pinelli Freitas, Karina Maria Salvatore Garib, Daniela |
author_facet | Pupulim, Daniela Cubas Henriques, José Fernando Castanha Janson, Guilherme Henriques, Fernanda Pinelli Freitas, Karina Maria Salvatore Garib, Daniela |
author_sort | Pupulim, Daniela Cubas |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the cephalometric changes in Class II division 1 malocclusion patients treated with Jones Jig appliance or with maxillary first premolar extractions. METHODS: The sample consisted of 88 lateral cephalograms of 44 patients, divided into two groups. Group 1 consisted of 21 patients treated with Jones Jig appliance, with a mean initial age of 12.88 ± 1.23 years and final mean age of 17.18 ± 1.37 years, and a mean treatment time of 4.29 years. Group 2 comprised 23 patients treated with maxillary first premolar extractions, with a mean initial age of 13.59 ± 1.91 years and mean final age of 16.39 ± 1.97 years, and a mean treatment time of 2.8 years. Intergroup treatment changes were compared with t and Mann-Whitney tests. RESULTS: Class II correction in G2 (maxillary first premolar extractions) presented significantly greater maxillary retrusion, reduction of anteroposterior apical base discrepancy, smaller increase in the lower anterior face height and significantly greater overjet reduction than G1 (Jones Jig). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with maxillary first premolar extractions produced greater overjet reduction, but the two treatment protocols produced similar changes in the soft tissue profile. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6526763 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | Dental Press International |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-65267632019-05-29 Comparison of dentoskeletal and soft tissue effects of Class II malocclusion treatment with Jones Jig appliance and with maxillary first premolar extractions Pupulim, Daniela Cubas Henriques, José Fernando Castanha Janson, Guilherme Henriques, Fernanda Pinelli Freitas, Karina Maria Salvatore Garib, Daniela Dental Press J Orthod Original Articles OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the cephalometric changes in Class II division 1 malocclusion patients treated with Jones Jig appliance or with maxillary first premolar extractions. METHODS: The sample consisted of 88 lateral cephalograms of 44 patients, divided into two groups. Group 1 consisted of 21 patients treated with Jones Jig appliance, with a mean initial age of 12.88 ± 1.23 years and final mean age of 17.18 ± 1.37 years, and a mean treatment time of 4.29 years. Group 2 comprised 23 patients treated with maxillary first premolar extractions, with a mean initial age of 13.59 ± 1.91 years and mean final age of 16.39 ± 1.97 years, and a mean treatment time of 2.8 years. Intergroup treatment changes were compared with t and Mann-Whitney tests. RESULTS: Class II correction in G2 (maxillary first premolar extractions) presented significantly greater maxillary retrusion, reduction of anteroposterior apical base discrepancy, smaller increase in the lower anterior face height and significantly greater overjet reduction than G1 (Jones Jig). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with maxillary first premolar extractions produced greater overjet reduction, but the two treatment protocols produced similar changes in the soft tissue profile. Dental Press International 2019 /pmc/articles/PMC6526763/ /pubmed/31116288 http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/2177-6709.24.2.056-065.oar Text en © 2019 Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License |
spellingShingle | Original Articles Pupulim, Daniela Cubas Henriques, José Fernando Castanha Janson, Guilherme Henriques, Fernanda Pinelli Freitas, Karina Maria Salvatore Garib, Daniela Comparison of dentoskeletal and soft tissue effects of Class II malocclusion treatment with Jones Jig appliance and with maxillary first premolar extractions |
title | Comparison of dentoskeletal and soft tissue effects of Class II malocclusion treatment with Jones Jig appliance and with maxillary first premolar extractions |
title_full | Comparison of dentoskeletal and soft tissue effects of Class II malocclusion treatment with Jones Jig appliance and with maxillary first premolar extractions |
title_fullStr | Comparison of dentoskeletal and soft tissue effects of Class II malocclusion treatment with Jones Jig appliance and with maxillary first premolar extractions |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of dentoskeletal and soft tissue effects of Class II malocclusion treatment with Jones Jig appliance and with maxillary first premolar extractions |
title_short | Comparison of dentoskeletal and soft tissue effects of Class II malocclusion treatment with Jones Jig appliance and with maxillary first premolar extractions |
title_sort | comparison of dentoskeletal and soft tissue effects of class ii malocclusion treatment with jones jig appliance and with maxillary first premolar extractions |
topic | Original Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6526763/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31116288 http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/2177-6709.24.2.056-065.oar |
work_keys_str_mv | AT pupulimdanielacubas comparisonofdentoskeletalandsofttissueeffectsofclassiimalocclusiontreatmentwithjonesjigapplianceandwithmaxillaryfirstpremolarextractions AT henriquesjosefernandocastanha comparisonofdentoskeletalandsofttissueeffectsofclassiimalocclusiontreatmentwithjonesjigapplianceandwithmaxillaryfirstpremolarextractions AT jansonguilherme comparisonofdentoskeletalandsofttissueeffectsofclassiimalocclusiontreatmentwithjonesjigapplianceandwithmaxillaryfirstpremolarextractions AT henriquesfernandapinelli comparisonofdentoskeletalandsofttissueeffectsofclassiimalocclusiontreatmentwithjonesjigapplianceandwithmaxillaryfirstpremolarextractions AT freitaskarinamariasalvatore comparisonofdentoskeletalandsofttissueeffectsofclassiimalocclusiontreatmentwithjonesjigapplianceandwithmaxillaryfirstpremolarextractions AT garibdaniela comparisonofdentoskeletalandsofttissueeffectsofclassiimalocclusiontreatmentwithjonesjigapplianceandwithmaxillaryfirstpremolarextractions |