Cargando…

Can Orthodontic Treatment Be Stable 20 Years after the End of the Treatment Scheme? Treatment of a Class 2, Division 1 Malocclusion with Severe Skeletal Discrepancy and Its 20-Year Follow-Up

Class II malocclusions, after class I malocclusions, are the most frequent in the juvenile Italian population. They are most often skeletal in origin and due to mandibular retrusion. Functional devices seem to have a beneficial effect on the growth of the jaw. Long-term maintenance of the achieved r...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Aiello, Domenico, Nucera, Riccardo, Costa, Stefania, Figliuzzi, Michele Mario, Paduano, Sergio
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Hindawi 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8497136/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34631176
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2021/4810584
_version_ 1784579888117710848
author Aiello, Domenico
Nucera, Riccardo
Costa, Stefania
Figliuzzi, Michele Mario
Paduano, Sergio
author_facet Aiello, Domenico
Nucera, Riccardo
Costa, Stefania
Figliuzzi, Michele Mario
Paduano, Sergio
author_sort Aiello, Domenico
collection PubMed
description Class II malocclusions, after class I malocclusions, are the most frequent in the juvenile Italian population. They are most often skeletal in origin and due to mandibular retrusion. Functional devices seem to have a beneficial effect on the growth of the jaw. Long-term maintenance of the achieved results is essential for therapeutic success in any orthodontic treatment; moreover, the retention phase should last as long as possible, especially in the lower anterior sector. A female patient aged 10 years and 3 months presented a visibly convex profile and a severe mandibular retrusion. The anamnesis brought to light the habit of oral breathing and lower-lip sucking. The cephalometric analysis showed a normodivergent skeletal class II. The first treatment phase involved the use of a Bass type for 12 months at the end of the functional treatment; the second phase of fixed therapy was carried out following the principles of bioprogressive techniques. The photos at the end of treatment show an important improvement in the profile; a full class I ratio of molar and canine teeth was achieved with an excellent interarch relationship and a correction of the V-shaped upper arch. The result is occlusally and profilometrically stable after 2, 4, 5, 10, 14, and 20 years. The maintenance of a stable orthodontic result over time is the result not only of a correct and physiological occlusion but also and above all of a correct diagnosis and correct identification of problems that can cause the malocclusion itself. Flawed habits such as interposition of the lower lip and oral breathing must be intercepted and corrected early in order to correct them and not affect the long-term result of orthodontic treatment. In this case, a functional device associated with an orthodontic fixed finishing and a correct retention phase were necessary to correctly treat a second-class mandibular retrusion whose result remained stable 20 years after the end of therapy.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8497136
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Hindawi
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-84971362021-10-08 Can Orthodontic Treatment Be Stable 20 Years after the End of the Treatment Scheme? Treatment of a Class 2, Division 1 Malocclusion with Severe Skeletal Discrepancy and Its 20-Year Follow-Up Aiello, Domenico Nucera, Riccardo Costa, Stefania Figliuzzi, Michele Mario Paduano, Sergio Case Rep Dent Case Report Class II malocclusions, after class I malocclusions, are the most frequent in the juvenile Italian population. They are most often skeletal in origin and due to mandibular retrusion. Functional devices seem to have a beneficial effect on the growth of the jaw. Long-term maintenance of the achieved results is essential for therapeutic success in any orthodontic treatment; moreover, the retention phase should last as long as possible, especially in the lower anterior sector. A female patient aged 10 years and 3 months presented a visibly convex profile and a severe mandibular retrusion. The anamnesis brought to light the habit of oral breathing and lower-lip sucking. The cephalometric analysis showed a normodivergent skeletal class II. The first treatment phase involved the use of a Bass type for 12 months at the end of the functional treatment; the second phase of fixed therapy was carried out following the principles of bioprogressive techniques. The photos at the end of treatment show an important improvement in the profile; a full class I ratio of molar and canine teeth was achieved with an excellent interarch relationship and a correction of the V-shaped upper arch. The result is occlusally and profilometrically stable after 2, 4, 5, 10, 14, and 20 years. The maintenance of a stable orthodontic result over time is the result not only of a correct and physiological occlusion but also and above all of a correct diagnosis and correct identification of problems that can cause the malocclusion itself. Flawed habits such as interposition of the lower lip and oral breathing must be intercepted and corrected early in order to correct them and not affect the long-term result of orthodontic treatment. In this case, a functional device associated with an orthodontic fixed finishing and a correct retention phase were necessary to correctly treat a second-class mandibular retrusion whose result remained stable 20 years after the end of therapy. Hindawi 2021-09-30 /pmc/articles/PMC8497136/ /pubmed/34631176 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2021/4810584 Text en Copyright © 2021 Domenico Aiello et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Case Report
Aiello, Domenico
Nucera, Riccardo
Costa, Stefania
Figliuzzi, Michele Mario
Paduano, Sergio
Can Orthodontic Treatment Be Stable 20 Years after the End of the Treatment Scheme? Treatment of a Class 2, Division 1 Malocclusion with Severe Skeletal Discrepancy and Its 20-Year Follow-Up
title Can Orthodontic Treatment Be Stable 20 Years after the End of the Treatment Scheme? Treatment of a Class 2, Division 1 Malocclusion with Severe Skeletal Discrepancy and Its 20-Year Follow-Up
title_full Can Orthodontic Treatment Be Stable 20 Years after the End of the Treatment Scheme? Treatment of a Class 2, Division 1 Malocclusion with Severe Skeletal Discrepancy and Its 20-Year Follow-Up
title_fullStr Can Orthodontic Treatment Be Stable 20 Years after the End of the Treatment Scheme? Treatment of a Class 2, Division 1 Malocclusion with Severe Skeletal Discrepancy and Its 20-Year Follow-Up
title_full_unstemmed Can Orthodontic Treatment Be Stable 20 Years after the End of the Treatment Scheme? Treatment of a Class 2, Division 1 Malocclusion with Severe Skeletal Discrepancy and Its 20-Year Follow-Up
title_short Can Orthodontic Treatment Be Stable 20 Years after the End of the Treatment Scheme? Treatment of a Class 2, Division 1 Malocclusion with Severe Skeletal Discrepancy and Its 20-Year Follow-Up
title_sort can orthodontic treatment be stable 20 years after the end of the treatment scheme? treatment of a class 2, division 1 malocclusion with severe skeletal discrepancy and its 20-year follow-up
topic Case Report
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8497136/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34631176
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2021/4810584
work_keys_str_mv AT aiellodomenico canorthodontictreatmentbestable20yearsaftertheendofthetreatmentschemetreatmentofaclass2division1malocclusionwithsevereskeletaldiscrepancyandits20yearfollowup
AT nucerariccardo canorthodontictreatmentbestable20yearsaftertheendofthetreatmentschemetreatmentofaclass2division1malocclusionwithsevereskeletaldiscrepancyandits20yearfollowup
AT costastefania canorthodontictreatmentbestable20yearsaftertheendofthetreatmentschemetreatmentofaclass2division1malocclusionwithsevereskeletaldiscrepancyandits20yearfollowup
AT figliuzzimichelemario canorthodontictreatmentbestable20yearsaftertheendofthetreatmentschemetreatmentofaclass2division1malocclusionwithsevereskeletaldiscrepancyandits20yearfollowup
AT paduanosergio canorthodontictreatmentbestable20yearsaftertheendofthetreatmentschemetreatmentofaclass2division1malocclusionwithsevereskeletaldiscrepancyandits20yearfollowup