Arch dimensional changes following orthodontic treatment with extraction of four ‎first premolars

Document Type : Original Article(s)

Authors

1 Associate Professor, Dentofacial Deformities Research Center AND Department of Orthodontics, School of ‎Dentistry, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

2 Dentist, Private Practice, Isfahan, Iran

3 Professor, Department of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, ‎Tehran, Iran

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Tooth extraction as a part of orthodontic treatment plan to create space for leveling and aligning teeth or causing tooth movement leads to changes in arch width and length. The outcome of these changes is important for the clinicians and affects the treatment and retention plans. Despite some previous studies, data in this regard are still scarce and further investigation is required on this subject. The purpose of this study was to evaluate dental arch dimensional changes following four first premolars extraction orthodontic treatment.MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this study, 100 pairs of dental casts and respective patient records that fulfilled the inclusion criteria were randomly selected from the archives of the Department of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry in Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. Length and width of dental arch were measured on the initial and final casts of patients using a digital caliper with 0.1 mm precision. The mean, standard deviation (SD) and standard error of variables were determined, and the data were analyzed using SPSS software. Paired t-test was applied to compare changes before and after treatment.RESULTS: The obtained results showed that the maxillary and mandibular inter-canine widths significantly increased as the result of fixed appliance therapy with the extraction of four first premolars. The arch width at the second premolar and molar at mesiobuccal cusp tip and distobuccal cusp tip regions in the maxilla and mandible showed a significant reduction (P < 0.001). In this study, arch length at different points was measured. In the maxilla, the incisor-canine distance in both quadrants experienced a significant increase (P < 0.001). Furthermore, the canine-molar distance and the incisor-molar distance in both quadrants and the total arch length showed a significant reduction (P < 0.001). In the mandible, the incisor-canine distance in the right quadrant significantly increased (P < 0.050), but the reduction in the incisor-canine distance in the left quadrant was not statistically significant. Moreover, the canine-molar and the incisor-molar distance in both quadrants and the total arch length all decreased significantly (P < 0.001).CONCLUSION: Orthodontic treatment with extraction of four first premolars significantly increased the inter-canine width and incisor-canine distance in both jaws; but, the inter-premolar and inter-molar widths, canine-molar distance, incisor-molar distance, and total arch length significantly decreased.

Keywords

References

  1. Bishara SE, Jakobsen JR, Treder J, Nowak A. Arch width changes from 6 weeks to 45 years of age. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1997; 111(4): 401-9.
  2. Proffit WR, Fields HW, Sarver DM. Contemporary orthodontics. Philadelphia, PA: Mosby Elsevier; 2000. p.17-20, 249-51.
  3. Farhadian N, Miresmaeili AF, Soltani MK. Comparison of extraction and non-extraction orthodontic treatment using the objective grading system. J Dent Tehran Univ Med Sci 2005; 2(3): 91-5. [In Persian].
  4. Ward DE, Workman J, Brown R, Richmond S. Changes in arch width. A 20-year longitudinal study of orthodontic treatment. Angle Orthod 2006; 76(1): 6-13.
  5. Paquette DE, Beattie JR, Johnston LE. A long-term comparison of nonextraction and premolar extraction edgewise therapy in "borderline" Class II patients. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1992; 102(1): 1-14.
  6. Luppanapornlarp S, Johnston LE. The effects of premolar-extraction: a long-term comparison of outcomes in "clear-cut" extraction and nonextraction Class II patients. Angle Orthod 1993; 63(4): 257-72.
  7. Heiser W, Niederwanger A, Bancher B, Bittermann G, Neunteufel N, Kulmer S. Three-dimensional dental arch and palatal form changes after extraction and nonextraction treatment. Part 1. Arch length and area. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2004; 126(1): 71-81.
  8. Bishara SE, Bayati P, Zaher AR, Jakobsen JR. Comparisons of the dental arch changes in patients with Class II, division 1 malocclusions: extraction vs nonextraction treatments. Angle Orthod 1994; 64(5): 351-8.
  9. Kim E, Gianelly AA. Extraction vs nonextraction: arch widths and smile esthetics. Angle Orthod 2003; 73(4): 354-8.
  10. Aksu M, Kocadereli I. Arch width changes in extraction and nonextraction treatment in class I patients. Angle Orthod 2005; 75(6): 948-52.
  11. Isik F, Sayinsu K, Nalbantgil D, Arun T. A comparative study of dental arch widths: extraction and non-extraction treatment. Eur J Orthod 2005; 27(6): 585-9.
  12. Al-Sayagh NM. Maxillary arch dimensional changes in the extraction and non-extraction orthodontic treatment. Al-Rafidain Dent J 2008; 8(1): 26-37.
  13. Gianelly AA. Arch width after extraction and nonextraction treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2003; 123(1): 25-8.

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 09 July 2016
  • Revise Date: 07 May 2024
  • Accept Date: 12 March 2019

Share

How to cite

Statistics