Sınıf II bölüm 1 maloklüzyonlarda oksipital headgear ile ikiz blok apareyinin kombine tedavisinin pancherz yöntemiyle incelenmesi
Amaç: Araştırmamızın amacı, iskeletsel Sınıf 2, dişsel Sınıf II Bölüm 1 maloklüzyonlu hastaların tedavisinde kullanılan İkiz Blok ve oksipital headgear aparey kombinasyonunun Pancherz yöntemiyle overjet ve molar ilişkisi üzerine etkilerini incelemektir. Gereç ve Yöntem: iskeletsel Sınıf 2, dişsel Sınıf II Bölüm 1 malokluzyona sahip ortalama yaşları 13 olan toplam 21 birey tedavi grubu, yine iskeletsel Sınıf 2, dişsel Sınıf II Bölüm 1 maloklüzyona sahip ortalama yaşları 12,2 olan toplam 19 birey ise kontrol grubu olarak oluşturulmuştur. Bireylerin tedavi ve kontrol grubuna dahil edilmesinde, mandibular gerilik göstermelerine, SN-GoGn açısının normal veya artmış olmasına, artmış overjet ve overbite göstermelerine, pubertal büyüme atılımına yeni girmiş veya büyüme atılımının tepe noktasında olmalarına dikkat edilmiştir. Tedavi ile meydana gelen değişiklikleri incelemek için bireylerden alınan sefalometrik yan kafa filmleri hem tedavi başında hem de fonksiyonel tedavi sonunda alınmıştır. Bu şekilde elde edilen verileri istatistik olarak değerlendirmek için grup içi karşılaştırmada bağımlı T-testi, gruplar arası karşılaştırmada ise bağımsız T-testi kullanılmıştır. Bulgular: Yapılan istatistik değerlendirme sonucunda, bu tedavi tekniği Sınıf II Bölüm 1 maloklüzyonlu breylerin tedavisinde, overjet ve molar ilişkisi dentoalveolar değişiklikten ziyade ağırlıklı olarak iskeletsel değişikliklerle düzeltilmiştir. Sonuç: Pancherz analizi yöntemine göre, İkiz Blok ve ve oksipital headgear kombinasyonu Sınıf II Bölüm 1 maloklüzyonlu bireylerin tedavisinde overjet ve molar ilişkisi düzeltilmesinde önemli derecede etkili olduğu görülmektedir.
Analysis of occipital headgear and twin block appliance combination therapy of class II division 1 malocclusions using pancherz method
Background: The aim of our study is to analyze the effect of Twin Block appliance and occipital headgear combination therapy in patients with skeletal Class 2, dental Class II Division 1 malocclusion on overjet and molar relationship using Pancherz method. Methods: A treatment group consisting of 21 patients with an average age of 13 and skeletal Class 2, dental Class II Division 1 malocclusion and a control group consisting of 19 patients with an average age of 12,2 and skeletal Class 2, dental Class II Division 1 malocclusion were formed. The criteria for inclusion to the treatment and control groups were; the presentation of mandibular retrognathism, a normal or increased SN-GoGn angle, an increase in overjet and overbite, being at the start or the peak of pubertal growth spurt. Changes caused by the treatment were analyzed on lateral cephalograms taken before the treatment and at the end of the functional therapy. For the evaluation of statistical analysis; dependent t-test was used in intergroup comparisons whereas independent T-test was the choice for intragroup comparisons. Results: The results of the statistical evaluation revealed that in Twin Block and occipital headgear combination therapy; the overjet and molar relationship was corrected predominantly with skeletal changes rather than dentoalveolar alterations. Conclusion: According to the Pancherz analysis method, Twin Block and occipital headgear combination is significantly effective in the correction of overjet and molar relationship concerning the therapy of Class II Division 1 malocclusion patients.
___
1. Houston WJB, Tulley WJ. A textbook of orthodontics, Butterworth & Co. Ltd, London 1989;164:51-532. Sidlauskas A. The effects of the Twin-block appliance treatment on the skeletal and entoalveolar changes in Class II Division 1 malocclusion, Medicina (Kaunas) 2005;41(5)
3. McNamara JA. Neuromuscular and skeletal adaptations to altered function in the orofacial region., Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1973;64:578-606
4. Tümer N and Gültan AS. Comparison of the effects of monoblock and Twin-Block appliances on the skeletal and dentoalveolar structures, Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1999;116:460-8
5. Türkkahraman H, Sayın MÖ. Effect of activator and activator headgear treatment: comparison with untreated Class II subjects, European Journal of Orthodontics 2006;28:27-34
6. William BH. Anterior vertical incremental facial growth, Its effects in Class II treatment, Angle Orthodontist 1980;50(3):179-188
7. Gianelly AA. One-phase versus two-phase treatment, Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1995;108:556-9
8. Mills MC and McCulloch KJ. Posttreatment changes after successful correction of Class II malocclusions with the Twin-Block appliance, Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2000;118:24-33
9. Meach CL. A cephalometric comparison of bony profile changes in Class II Division 1 patients treated with extraoral forces and functional jaw orthopedics, Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1966;52(5):353-370
10. Jakobson SO. Cephalometric evaluation of treatment effect on Class II Division 1malocclusions, Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1967;53:446-457
11. Gültan AS. Sınıf II Bölüm 1 maloklüzyonların üst 1. küçük azı dişlerinin çekimi ile tesavisi, Türk Ortodonti Dergisi 1990;3(2):144-152
12. Snyder DR. An American board of orthodontics case report, Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1988;94:453-457
13. Chebre C. Vertical control with a headgear activator combination, Journal of Clinical Orthodontics 1990;24:618-624
14. Chang HF, Wu KM, Chen KC, CHeng MC. Effects of activator treatment on Class II Division 1 malocclusion, Journal of Clinical Orthodontics 1989;23:560-563
15. Joffe L, Jacobson A. The maxillary orthopedic splint, Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1979;75:54-69
16. Caldwell SF, Hymas TA, Timm TA. Maxillary traction splint, A cephalometric evaluation, Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1984;85:376-384
17. Peiffer JP, Grobety D. The Class II malocclusion : Differantial diagnosis and clinical application, and fixed appliances, Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1975;68:499- 544
18. Peiffer JP, Grobety D. A philosophy of combined orthodontic- orthopedic treatment, Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1982;81:185-201
19. Graber TM. Functional appliance, In Orthodontics Current Principles and Techniques, Ed by Darlene Warfel, 2, The C V Mosby company 1985;369-404
20. Woodside DG, Metaxas A, Altuna G. The influence of functional appliance therapy on glenoid fossa remodeling Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop 1987; 92:181-198
21. Ruf S, Baltromejus S, Pancherz H. Effective condylar growth and chin position changes in activator treatment: a cephalometric roentgenographic study, Angle Orthodontist 2001;71:4-11
22. Rabie ABM, Hagg U. Factors regulating condylar growth, Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop 2002;122: 40-409
23. Voudouris JC and Kuftinec MM. Inproved clinical use of Twin-Block and Herbst as a result of radiating viscoelastic tissue forces on the condyle and fossa in treatment and long-term retention: Growth relativity, Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2000;117: 247-66
24. Clark WJ. The Twin-block traction technique, European Journal of Orthodontics 1982;4:129-138
25. Illing HM, Morris DO, Lee RT. A prospective evaluation of Bass, Bionator and Twin Block appliances. Part 1-the hard tissues, European Journal of Orthodontics 1998;20: 501-16
26. Dermaut LR, van den Eynde F, de Pauw G. Skeletal and dento-alveolar changes as a result of headgear activator therapy related to different vertical growth patterns, European Journal of Orthodontics 1992;14:140-146
27. Gill DS and Lee RT. Prospective clinical trial comparing the effects of conventional Twin-Block and mini-block appliances: Part 1. Hard tissue changes, Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2005;127:465-72
28. Pancherz H. The mechanism of Class II correction in Herbst appliance treatment, Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1982;82:104
29. Konik M, Pancherz H, Hansen K. The mechanism of Class II correction in late Herbst Treatment, Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1997;112: 87–91
30. Dahlberg G (1940) Statistical methods for medical and biological students, Allen and Unwin, London, İn Cope JB, Buschang PH, Cope DD, Parker J, Blackwood HO. Quantitative evaluation of craniofacial changes with Jasper Jumper therapy, Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop 1994;64:113-122
31. Baccetti T, Franchi L, Toth LR, McNamara J. Treatment timing for Twin-Blok therapy, Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2000;118:159-70
- ISSN: 1300-5170
- Yayın Aralığı: Yılda 3 Sayı
- Başlangıç: 1991
- Yayıncı: İsmail Marakoğlu
Sayıdaki Diğer Makaleler
Mandibular agresif fibromatozis: Bir olgu sunumu
ALPARSLAN ESEN, Hasan KÜÇÜKKOLBAŞI, Ömer GÜNHAN
NEVİN ÇOBANOĞLU, Ali Rıza ÇETİN
The interdisciplinary treatment of anterior openbite
SERTAÇ AKSAKALLI, Celal IRGIN, Zekeriya TOSUN, Özgür İNAN
Farklı ışık kaynaklarının fissür örtücülerin bağlanma dayanımları üzerine etkisi
Murat Selim BOTSALI, Yağmur ŞENER
In vitro evaluation of shear bond strengths of different flowable resins
Fatma CEBE, Mehmet Ata CEBE, EMİNE ŞİRİN KARAARSLAN, Necdet ADANIR, Bora ÖZTÜRK