Users Online: 332
Home
About us
Editorial board
Search
Browse articles
Submit article
Instructions
Subscribe
Contacts
Login
» Articles published in the past year
To view other articles click corresponding year from the navigation links on the left side.
All
|
Case Report
|
Case Reports
|
Editorial
|
Guest Editorial
|
Original Articles
|
Review Article
|
Short Communication
|
Systematic Review
Export selected to
Endnote
Reference Manager
Procite
Medlars Format
RefWorks Format
BibTex Format
Show all abstracts
Show selected abstracts
Export selected to
Add to my list
Original Article:
Incisors' proportions in smile esthetics
Fahad F Alsulaimani, Waeil Batwa
J Orthodont Sci
2013, 2:109 (9 October 2013)
DOI
:10.4103/2278-0203.119685
PMID
:24987650
Aims:
To determine whether alteration of the maxillary central and lateral incisors' length and width, respectively, would affect perceived smile esthetics and to validate the most esthetic length and width, respectively, for the central and lateral incisors.
Materials and Methods:
Photographic manipulation was undertaken to produce two sets of photographs, each set of four photographs showing the altered width of the lateral incisor and length of the central length. The eight produced photographs were assessed by laypeople, dentists and orthodontists.
Results:
Alteration in the incisors' proportion affected the relative smile attractiveness for laypeople (
n
=124), dentists (
n
=115) and orthodontists (
n
=68); dentists and orthodontists did not accept lateral width reduction of more than 0.5 mm (
P
<0.01), which suggests that the lateral to central incisor width ratio ranges from 54% to 62%. However, laypeople did not accept lateral width reduction of more than 1 mm (
P
<0.01), widening the range to be from 48% to 62%. All groups had zero tolerance for changes in central crown length (
P
<0.01).
Conclusion:
All participants recognized that the central incisors' length changes. For lateral incisors, laypeople were more tolerant than dentists and orthodontists. This suggests that changing incisors' proportions affects the relative smile attractiveness.
[ABSTRACT]
[HTML Full text]
[PDF]
[Mobile Full text]
[EPub]
[Citations (7) ]
[PubMed]
[Sword Plugin for Repository]
Beta
Original Article:
Maxillary molar distalization with MGBM-system in class II malocclusion
Giuliano Maino, Lisa Mariani, Ida Bozzo, Giovanna Maino, Alberto Caprioglio
J Orthodont Sci
2013, 2:101 (9 October 2013)
DOI
:10.4103/2278-0203.119683
PMID
:24987649
Aims:
Objective of this retrospective study was to evaluate the treatment effects of the MGBM-System (G.B Maino, A. Giannelly, R. Bernard, P. Mura), a new intraoral device to treat Class II malocclusions with no patient cooperation by unilateral or bilateral molar distalization.
Materials and Methods:
A retrospective study was conducted to compare the pre-distalization and post-distalization cephalograms and dental model casts of 30 patients (15 male, 15 female) with Class II malocclusion treated with MGBM-System. Mean age at the beginning of treatment was 13.3 years (standard deviation 3.3). Angular, horizontal and vertical measurements were recorded to monitor skeletal and dental-alveolar changes. Molar movements in horizontal plane were monitored by making dental measurements on dental model casts.
Results:
The MGBM-System produced a rapid molar distalization and Class II relationship was corrected in 8 months 2.05, on average. The maxillary first molars were distalized of 4.14 (PTV-6 cemento-enamel junction), associated with a significant distal axis incline of 10. 5° referred to SN and a significant intrusion of 1.3 mm (PP). As for anchorage loss, the first premolar exhibited a significant mesial movement of 0.86 mm, associated with a significant mesial axis incline of 2.46°. No significative changes in either sagittal or vertical skeletal relationship were observed.
Conclusion:
The results suggest that the MGBM-System is an efficient and reliable device for distalizing the maxillary permanent first and second molars.
[ABSTRACT]
[HTML Full text]
[PDF]
[Mobile Full text]
[EPub]
[Citations (6) ]
[PubMed]
[Sword Plugin for Repository]
Beta
Original Article:
An odontometric study of tooth size in normal, crowded and spaced dentitions
Iman Bugaighis, Suleiman Elorfi
J Orthodont Sci
2013, 2:95 (9 October 2013)
DOI
:10.4103/2278-0203.119681
PMID
:24987648
Objective:
To assess the mesio-distal tooth width in normal, crowded, or spaced dentitions.
Materials and Methods:
A sample of 192 maxillary and mandibular dental casts of Libyan subjects was selected from a larger cohort. These subjects did not present with craniofacial anomaly, hypodontia, significant attrition, caries, restorations, or history of permanent tooth extraction or orthodontic treatment. The sample was divided into normal, crowded, and spaced groups according to tooth size/arch length discrepancy. Each group included 32 upper and lower dental casts with equal numbers of males (mean (SD) age = 14.7 (1.9) years) and females (mean (SD) age = 15.7 (2.5) years). The mesiodistal (MD) tooth width, sum of the MD tooth widths mesial to the first molars (TTM), sum of the MD width of the four incisors (I), and the sum of the MD width of canine and first and second premolars (CPP) were calculated for each group. The independent Student
t
-test was applied sequentially to detect significant differences between paired groups. The ANOVA test was undertaken to explore significant differences between the three groups. Pearson coefficient of correlation was used to evaluate the correlation between I and the corresponding CPP in maxillary and mandibular arches.
Results:
MD tooth width, TTM, I, and CPP were significantly wider in the crowded compared to normal and spaced dentitions (
P
<0.001), except for the width of the upper left lateral incisors in both normal and crowded groups. Although there was a trend for smaller tooth widths in spaced dentitions compared to normal ones, this was only significant in the maxillary left central incisor, maxillary right and left lateral incisors, maxillary right first premolar, mandibular right lateral incisor, and mandibular right canine (
P
<0.05). However, the maxillary TTM, I, and CPP in the normal group were significantly greater than in the spaced group (
P
<0.05). Significant positive correlations existed between the mean values of I and CPP in both the maxillary and mandibular dentitions of all groups (
P
<0.01).
Conclusions:
It appears that in the studied Libyan population, the MD tooth width is a significant component of crowding/spacing.
[ABSTRACT]
[HTML Full text]
[PDF]
[Mobile Full text]
[EPub]
[Citations (5) ]
[PubMed]
[Sword Plugin for Repository]
Beta
Original Article:
Recycling stainless steel orthodontic brackets with Er:YAG laser - An environmental scanning electron microscope and shear bond strength study
Prince K Chacko, Jithesh Kodoth, Jacob John, Kishore Kumar
J Orthodont Sci
2013, 2:87 (9 October 2013)
DOI
:10.4103/2278-0203.119680
PMID
:24987647
Aim:
To determine the efficiency of erbium: Yttrium aluminum garnet (Er:YAG) laser with Environmental Scanning Electron Microscope (ESEM) and shear bond strength analysis as a method of recycling stainless steel orthodontic brackets and compare with other methods of recycling.
Materials and Methods:
Eighty samples of extracted premolar teeth bonded to SS brackets were tested for rebonded shear bond strength after recycling by four methods and compared with a control group of 20 samples. These 80 samples were randomized into four groups which were recycled by four methods, namely, sandblasting, thermal method, adhesive grinding by tungsten carbide bur, and Er: YAG laser method. After recycling, ESEM and shear bond strength analysis were used to analyze the efficiency of the recycling methods
Results:
Er: YAG laser group was found to be having the greatest bond strength among the recycled brackets (8.33±2.51 followed by the sandblasting at 6.12±1.12 MPa, thermal and electropolishing at 4.44±0.95 MPa, and lastly the adhesive grinding method at 3.08±1.07 MPa. The shear bond strength of Er: YAG laser group was found to be having no statistically significant difference with that of the control group (
P
>0.05 and had statistical signifance with sandblasting, thermal and electropolishing and adhesive grinding groups at
P
>0.001. ESEM analysis showed complete removal of adhesive from the brackets recycled with Er: YAG laser which mimicked that of the control group.
Conclusion:
Er: YAG laser (2940 nm) was found to be the most efficient method for recycling, followed by the sandblasting, thermal, and the tungsten carbide methods, which had the least shear bond strength value and is not fit for clinical usage.
[ABSTRACT]
[HTML Full text]
[PDF]
[Mobile Full text]
[EPub]
[Citations (11) ]
[PubMed]
[Sword Plugin for Repository]
Beta
Review Article:
Iatrogenic possibilities of orthodontic treatment and modalities of prevention
Nazeer Ahmed Meeran
J Orthodont Sci
2013, 2:73 (9 October 2013)
PMID
:24987646
The benefits of orthodontic treatment are numerous and in most cases, the benefits outweigh the possible disadvantages. Orthodontic treatment can play an important role in enhancing esthetics, function, and self-esteem in patients. However, it carries with it the risks of enamel demineralization, tissue damage, root resorption, open gingival embrasures in the form of triangular spaces, allergic reactions to nickel, and treatment failure in the form of relapse. These potential complications are easily avoidable by undertaking certain precautions and timely interventions by both the orthodontist and the patient. The orthodontist must ensure that the patient is aware of the associated risks and stress the importance of the patient's role in preventing these untoward outcomes. The decision whether to proceed with the orthodontic treatment is essentially a risk-benefit analysis, where the perceived benefits of commencing treatment outweigh the potential risks. This article provides an overview of the iatrogenic possibilities of orthodontic treatment and the role of the patient as well as the orthodontist in preventing the associated risks.
[ABSTRACT]
[HTML Full text]
[PDF]
[Mobile Full text]
[EPub]
[PubMed]
[Sword Plugin for Repository]
Beta
Feedback
Subscribe
Advanced Search
Month wise articles
Figures next to the month indicate the number of articles in that month
2023
April
[
11
]
March
[
24
]
2022
October
[
11
]
August
[
15
]
May
[
24
]
January
[
6
]
2021
October
[
7
]
August
[
6
]
July
[
5
]
February
[
6
]
2020
November
[
5
]
August
[
5
]
July
[
4
]
February
[
5
]
2019
October
[
4
]
August
[
5
]
May
[
5
]
February
[
5
]
2018
November
[
5
]
September
[
5
]
June
[
6
]
February
[
8
]
2017
October
[
7
]
June
[
6
]
May
[
6
]
January
[
5
]
2016
October
[
5
]
July
[
5
]
March
[
6
]
February
[
7
]
January
[
6
]
2015
July
[
7
]
April
[
4
]
January
[
6
]
2014
October
[
7
]
July
[
5
]
May
[
5
]
February
[
4
]
2013
December
[
5
]
October
[
5
]
July
[
5
]
April
[
5
]
January
[
4
]
2012
November
[
5
]
August
[
5
]
April
[
5
]
Sitemap
|
What's New
Feedback
|
Copyright and Disclaimer
|
Privacy Notice
© Journal of Orthodontic Science | Published by Wolters Kluwer -
Medknow
Online since 01 August, 2011