KOMPLEKS PROBLEMLERLE BİRLİKTE GÖRÜLEN DERİN KAPANIŞLI SINIF II,1 MALOKLUZYONUN ANTERİOR MİNİVİDA VE SABİT MEKANİKLERLE TEDAVİSİ VAKA RAPORU

Sınıf II,1 malokluzyonlar çoğunlukla genetik geçişli olup toplumumuzda görülme sıklığı oldukça fazla olan ortodontik bir malokluzyon türüdür. Genel tabir itibariyle halk arasında ‘üst çene fırlaklığı’ olarak nitelendirilmekle birlikte, alt çenenin geride konumlanması ya da her iki durumun katkısı sonucunda da ortaya çıkabilmektedir. Vakanın ağırlığı ile ilişkili olarak, bu malokluzyona sahip bireylerde fasiyal estetiğin de etkili olarak düzeltilebilmesi için karışık dişlenme döneminden itibaren tedavilerine başlanması gereklidir. Bireyin gelişim durumu erişkine doğru ilerlediğinde, fasiyal ve dental estetik için hem tedavi aygıtlarının yoğunluğu hem de şiddeti artırılmaktadır. Gelişimi bitmiş, orta dereceli maloklüzyona sahip bireylerde, sadece dentoalveolar düzeyde ortodontik uygulamalar söz konusu olabilmektedir. Ancak bu uygulamaların fasiyal estetiğe katkısı son derece kısıtlıdır. Erişkin bireylerin Sınıf II,1 malokluzyona bağlı ağır estetik kaygılarına ise sadece ortodonti ve cerrahi iş birliği ile çözüm getirilebilmektedir. Bu olgu sunumunda; arzu edilmeyen estetik görüntü, ileri derecede fonksiyon kaybı, çok sayıda diş eksikliği ile birlikte derin kapanışa sahip, üst sınırda Sınıf II,1 malokluzyonlu erişkin bireye ait ortodontik tedavi sonuçları değerlendirilecektir

Anahtar Kelimeler:

Erişkin, Sınıf II, 1, Derin kapanış, Maksiller kesici intrüzyonu, Mini implant, Üst sınır ortodontik tedavi

Treatment of Class II,1 Deepbite Malocclusion with Other Complex Problems by Anterior Miniscrews and Fixed Appliances Case Report

Class II, 1 malocclusions are often inherited in our society, which is pretty much the incidence of a type of orthodontic malocclusion. As general popularly called 'upper jaw prominent' dubbed together, retrusive position of the lower jaw, or may appear as a result of the contribution of the comorbidity. As relation to the severity of the case, for effective correction of the facial aesthetics of this malocclusions, orthodontic treatment must be started at the period of mixed dentition. The developmental stage of the individual progresses to adult, as well as the severity and intensity of treatment device should be increased for facial and dental aesthetics. Development done in patients with moderate malocclusion, however, there can be only dentoalveolar level of orthodontic applications. However, the contribution to facial aesthetics of these applications is extremely limited. The solution of severe aesthetic apprehension due to Class II malocclusion of adult individuals, only can be brought with the cooperation of orthodontics and surgery. In this case report, upper limit orthodontic treatment results of adult person with Class II,1 malocclusions, who has undesired aesthetics appearance, advanced degree loss of function, multiple missing teeth, and deepbite will be evaluated

Keywords:

Adult, Class II, 1, Deepbite, Maxillary incisor intrusions, Mini implant, Upper limit orthodontic treatment.,

PDF

___

Moyers, R.E., Rıolo, M.L., Guıre, K.E., Waınrıght, R.L., Booksteın, F.L. Differen- tial diagnosis of Class II malocclusion. Part Facial types associated with Class II malocclusions. Am. J. Orthod. 1980; 78(5): 494.
Prakash, P., Margolis, H.I. Dento craniofa- cial relations in varying degrees of over- bite. Am. J. Orthod. 1952; 38: 657-673.
Peck S., Peck L., Kataja M. Class II Divi- sion 2 malocclusion: A heritable pattern of small teeth in well-developed jaws. Angle Orthod. 1998; 68(1): 9-20.
Beckmann S.H., Kuitert R.B., Prahl- Andersen B., Segner D., Tuinzing D.B. Al- veolar and skeletal dimensions associated with lower face height. Am. J. Orthod. Dentofac. Orthop. 1998; 113: 498-506.
Betzenberger D., Ruf S., Pancherz H. The compensatory mechanism in high-angle malocclusions: A copmparison of subjects in the mixed and permanent dentition. An- gle Orthod. 1999; 69(1): 27-32.
McNamara JA Jr. Compenents of Class II malocclusion in children 8-10 years of age. Angle Orthod. 1981; 51: 177-202.
Feldmann I., Lundström F., Peck S., Oc- clusal changes from adolescence to adult- hood in untreated patients with Class II di- vision 1 deepbite malocclusion. Angle Or- thod. 1999; 69(1): 33-38.
Melsen B., Agerbaek N., Markenstam G. Intrusion of incisors in adult patients with marginal bone loss. Am. J. Orthod. Den- tofac. Orthop. 1989; 96: 232-241.
Melsen B. Current controversies in ortho- dontics. Chapter 7. Quintessence Publish- ing Co, Inc, Chicago, Illionis; 1991.
Kinzinger G., Frye L., Diedrich P., Class II treatment in adults: Comparing camouflage orthodontics, dentofacial orthopedics and orthognathicsurgery – A cephalometric study to evaluate various therapeutic ef- fects. J. Orofac. Orthop. 2008; 69: 63–91.
Kim S.H., Park Y.G., Chung K. Severe Class II anterior deep bite malocclusion treated with a C-lingual retractor. Angle Orthod. 2004; p74(2): 280-285.
Mihalik C.A., Proffit W.R., Phillips C., Long-term follow-up of Class II adults treated with orthodontic camouflage: a comparison with orthognathic surgery out- comes. Am. J. Orthod. Dentofac. Orthop. ; 123: 266-78.
Nanda R. Biomechanics and esthetic strat- egies in clinical orthodontics. ElsevierInc. Melsen B., Bosch C. Different approaches to anchorage: A survey and evaluation. Angle Orthod. 1997; 67: 23-30.
Nanda R. Correction of deep overbite in adults. Dent. Clin. North. Am. 1997; 41: 87
Burstone CR. Deep overbite correction by intrusion. Am. J. Orthod. 1977; 72(1): 22
Shroff B.,Yoon W.M., Lindauer S., Bur- stone CR. Simultaneous intrusion and re- traction using a three-piece base arch. An- gle Orthod. 1997; 67: 455-461.
Van Steenbergen E., Burstone C.J., Prahl- Andersen B., Aartman I.H.A. The role of a highpull headgear in counteracting sideef- fects from intrusion of the maxillary anterior segment. Angle Orthod. 2004; 74: 480-486
Ohnishi H., Yagi T., Yasuda Y., Takada K. A mini- implant for orthodontic anchorage in a deep overbite case. Angle Orthod. ; 75: 444-452.
Deguchi T., Murakami T., Kuroda S., Yabuuchi T., Kamioka H., Takano- Yamamoto T. Comparison of the intrusion effects on the maxillary incisors between implant anchorage and J-hook headgear. Am. J. Orthod. Dentofac. Orthop. 2008; : 654-660.
Upadhyay M., Nagaraj K., Yadav S., Saxena R. Mini-implants for en masse in- trusion of maxillary anterior teeth in a se- vere Class II division 2 malocclusion. J Or- thod. 2008; 35(2): 79-89
Kim T.W., Kim H., Lee S.J. Correction of deep overbite and gummy smile by using a mini-implant with a segmented wire in a growing Class II division 2 patient. Am. J. Orthod. Dentofac. Orthop. 2006; 130(5): 85.
Upadhyay M., Nagaraj K., Yadav S., Saxena R. Mini-implants for en masse in- trusion of maxillary anterior teeth in a se- vere Class II division 2 malocclusion. J Or- thod. 2008;35:79–89
Nishimura M., Sannohe M., Nagasaka H., Igarashi K., Sugawara J. Nonextraction treatment with temporary skeletal anchor- age devices to correct a Class II Division 2 malocclusion with excessive gingival dis- play. Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial. Orthop. ; 145: 85-94
Clifford P.M., Orr J.F., Burden D.J. The ef- fects of increasing the reverse curve of Spee in a lower arch wire examined using a dynamic photo-elastic gelatine model. Eur. J. Orthod. 1999; 21: 213-22.