The effect of a lip bumper on lower dental arch dimensions and tooth positions

The effect of a lip bumper on the dimensions of the lower dental arch and on the inclination of the incisors and first molars was studied in 40 children, aged 9-12 years. The children wore their lip bumper full time for 7-10 months. The effects of the lip bumper therapy were recorded on dental casts and profile cephalograms made before and after the treatment. The positions and stages of development of the lower second molars were determined on pretreatment intra-oral radiographs. The lip bumper treatment resulted in an increase of the dental arch widths between the molars, premolars, and canines. The arch length increased through proclination of the incisors and uprighting of the first molars. The stages of development and the positions of the second molars had no influence on the effect of the treatment. Simultaneous treatment in the maxilla with a headgear, a transpalatal arch or a removable plate had no influence on the outcome of the lip bumper therap

Success rate of paramedian palatal implants in adolescent and adult orthodontic patients: a retrospective cohort study

The purpose of this study was to examine the success rate of paramedian palatal Orthosystem first- and second-generation implants used for anchorage in orthodontic treatment in patients treated by one experienced orthodontist. The records of 143 patients (90 female, 53 male, median age: 15.7 years, range: 10.2-50.9) receiving 145 palatal implants of the first or second generation (Orthosystem, Straumann AG, Basel, Switzerland) were examined. All the palatal implants were placed in a paramedian palatal location by three experienced surgeons. Stable implants were orthodontically loaded after a healing period of 3 months. Out of the 145 inserted paramedian palatal implants only seven implants (4.8%) were not considered stable after insertion. All the successfully osseointegrated implants remained stable during orthodontic treatment. Paramedian palatal implants are highly reliable and effective devices to obtain skeletal anchorage for orthodontic treatment. This study has shown that the paramedian location is a good alternative to the median locatio

Objective assessment of patient compliance with removable orthodontic appliances: a cross-sectional cohort study.

OBJECTIVE To assess objectively patient compliance with removable orthodontic appliances and the effect of possible influential factors. MATERIALS AND METHODS Wearing times of 45 White patients were recorded with the aid of the TheraMon microsensor. Patient compliance was assessed relative to wear prescription and other parameters, such as age and sex. RESULTS There was high individual variation in most measured variables and in all groups/subgroups. During a median observation period of 186 days (range, 55-318 days) the actual wear time was 9.0 h/d (range, 0.0-16.0 h/d) and did not differ between distinct prescriptions (P = .49). Eight patients wore their appliances less than 2 h/d, and six of them did not wear their appliances at all. Overall, the median wear per day relative to prescription was 62.5% (range, 0.0-89.3%) for the 14 h/d and 112.5% (range, 0.0-200.0%) for the 8 h/d prescription wear (P = .01) groups. There was a strong negative correlation of age (median: 12.5 years) with the daily percentage of actual wear time per day relative to wear prescription (14 h/d prescription: n = 21, rho = -0.61, P = .00; 8 h/d prescription: n = 24, rho = -0.73, P = .00), while sex did not exert a significant influence on compliance (P = .58). CONCLUSIONS Despite the fact that patients and parents were informed about wear time recording, compliance was insufficient with regard to functional treatment (14 h/d prescription), while it was sufficient for retention purposes (8 h/d prescription). Objective measures are necessary to assess compliance with removable orthodontic appliances since patient compliance is a highly variable issue

Success rate of paramedian palatal implants in adolescent and adult orthodontic patients: a retrospective cohort study.

The purpose of this study was to examine the success rate of paramedian palatal Orthosystem first- and second-generation implants used for anchorage in orthodontic treatment in patients treated by one experienced orthodontist. The records of 143 patients (90 female, 53 male, median age: 15.7 years, range: 10.2-50.9) receiving 145 palatal implants of the first or second generation (Orthosystem, Straumann AG, Basel, Switzerland) were examined. All the palatal implants were placed in a paramedian palatal location by three experienced surgeons. Stable implants were orthodontically loaded after a healing period of 3 months. Out of the 145 inserted paramedian palatal implants only seven implants (4.8%) were not considered stable after insertion. All the successfully osseointegrated implants remained stable during orthodontic treatment. Paramedian palatal implants are highly reliable and effective devices to obtain skeletal anchorage for orthodontic treatment. This study has shown that the paramedian location is a good alternative to the median location

Does the maxillary midline diastema close after frenectomy?

OBJECTIVE To analyze the closure, persistence or reopening of the maxillary midline diastema after frenectomy in patients with and without subsequent orthodontic treatment. METHOD AND MATERIALS All patients undergoing frenectomy with a CO2 laser were included in this retrospective study during the period of September 2002 to June 2011. Age and sex, the dimension of the diastema, eruption status of the maxillary canines, and the presence of an orthodontic treatment were recorded at the day of frenectomy and during follow-up. RESULTS Of the 59 patients fulfilling the inclusion criteria, 31 (52.5%) had an active orthodontic therapy, while 27 (45.8%) had a frenectomy without orthodontic treatment. For one patient, information concerning orthodontic treatment was not available. In the first follow-up (2 to 12 weeks), only four diastemas closed after frenectomy and orthodontic treatment, and none after frenectomy alone. In the second follow-up (4 to 19 months), statistically significantly (P = .002) more diastemas (n = 20) closed with frenectomy and orthodontic treatment than with frenectomy alone (n = 3). At the long-term (21 to 121 months) follow-up, only four patients had a persisting diastema, and in three patients orthodontic treatment was ongoing. CONCLUSION Closure of the maxillary midline diastema with a prominent frenum is more predictable with frenectomy and concomitant orthodontic treatment than with frenectomy alone. This study demonstrates the importance of an interdisciplinary approach to treat maxillary midline diastemas, ideally including general practitioners, oral surgeons, periodontists, and orthodontists

Orthodontic retention procedures in Switzerland.

OBJECTIVE To survey retention procedures used in orthodontic practices in Switzerland. MATERIAL AND METHODS A questionnaire previously developed by Renkema et al. (2009) was sent to 223 Swiss orthodontists. The questionnaire comprised six parts, mainly containing multiple-choice questions. Information as to background education of the individual orthodontist, retention in general, frequency of different types of removable or bonded retainers that were used, retention pro- tocol, and the type and size of the wire used for bonded retainers was assessed. RESULTS The overall response rate was 65 percent. Most orthodontists placed a bonded retainer in the upper and lower arch, except when the upper arch was expanded during treatment or when extractions were performed in the upper arch, in which case they placed a combination of fixed and removable retainers. Opinions varied with regard to how many hours the removable retainers should be worn and the duration of the retention phase. As far as bonded retainers were concerned, 87 percent of the orthodontists preferred life-long retention. Ninety-three percent of the orthodontists considered that the development of a guide- line on retention procedures would be useful. CONCLUSIONS The choice of retention procedures is mostly based on orthodontists personal preference. A further research into the long-term effectiveness of individual retention protocols is needed