Skip to content
2000
Volume 3, Issue 1
  • ISSN: 2542-579X
  • E-ISSN: 2542-5803

Abstract

Introduction

Correction of skeletal Class II malocclusion generally requires extraction of the premolars, followed by retraction of the anterior teeth to reduce overjet. Morphometric evaluation of alveolar bone can be used to study the limitation of tooth movement to avoid adverse effects. The purpose of this study is to measure the changes in the bone thickness of the maxillary incisors in skeletal Class II malocclusion patients after retraction and determine the relationship between changes in bone thickness and the amount of retractions using lateral cephalometric radiographs.

Materials and Methods

This study was designed to determine the cross-sectional changes in bone thickness in linear directions after retraction, and the relationship between changes in bone thickness and the amount of retraction. Bone thickness in the linear directions was measured using digital cephalometric radiographs.

Results

The measurement results from tracing 43 lateral cephalometric before and after anterior retraction treatment showed a difference in alveolar bone thickness at the 9mm level from the CEJ in a linear direction on the anterior retraction of skeletal Class II malocclusion maxillary incisors ( <0.05); however, there was no difference observed in alveolar bone thickness at levels 3 and 6 mm from CEJ in the linear direction and in the angular direction (> 0.05). Changes in alveolar bone thickness did not correlate with the amount of incisor retraction (> 0.05).

Conclusion

The results showed the change in labial alveolar bone thickness was not significantly correlate with the amount of retraction.

© 2021 Bentham Science Publishers
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/cdent/10.2174/2542579X03666210616150715
2021-06-16
2025-09-04

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/cdent/10.2174/2542579X03666210616150715
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. SarikayaS. HaydarB. CiğerS. AriyürekM. Changes in alveolar bone thickness due to retraction of anterior teeth.Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop.20021221152610.1067/mod.2002.11980412142888
     [Google Scholar]
  2. BisharaS.E. Class II malocclusions: Diagnostic and clinical considerations with and without treatment.Semin. Orthod.2006121112410.1053/j.sodo.2005.10.005
     [Google Scholar]
  3. QamruddinI. ShahidF. AlamM.K. Zehra JamalW. Camouflage of severe skeletal class II gummy smile patient treated nonsurgically with mini implants.Case Rep. Dent.2014201438236710.1155/2014/38236725548686
     [Google Scholar]
  4. SolemR.C. MarascoR. Guiterrez-PulidoL. NielsenI. KimS.H. NelsonG. Three-dimensional soft-tissue and hard-tissue changes in the treatment of bimaxillary protrusion.Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop.2013144221822810.1016/j.ajodo.2013.03.01823910203
     [Google Scholar]
  5. LeonardiR. AnnunziataA. LicciardelloV. BarbatoE. Soft tissue changes following the extraction of premolars in nongrowing patients with bimaxillary protrusion. A systematic review.Angle Orthod.201080121121610.2319/010709‑16.119852663
     [Google Scholar]
  6. YolandaE. Prevalensi maloklusi yang ditemukan pada pemeriksaan radiografi sefalometri di rsgm unhas.Skripsi20173338
     [Google Scholar]
  7. MarshadhiantiD PurwanegaraMK Orthodontic camouflage treatment of a high-angle severe skeletal class II discrepancy orthodontic.2019263170174
     [Google Scholar]
  8. JoshiN. HamdanA.M. FakhouriW.D. Skeletal malocclusion: A developmental disorder with a life-long morbidity.J. Clin. Med. Res.20146639940810.14740/jocmr1905w25247012
     [Google Scholar]
  9. BokhariF. AsadS. Sagittal pattern and severity of skeletal discrepancy in class II div 1 malocclusion.POJ2010226671
     [Google Scholar]
  10. KhanL. HalwaiH.K. YadavR. BirringO.J.S. Orthodontic camouflage treatment of class II malocclusion in non-growing patient - A case report.Orthod J Nepal.201651464910.3126/ojn.v5i1.14501
     [Google Scholar]
  11. GillD.S. NainiF.B. Class II division 1 malocclusion.Orthodontics: Principles and practice1stOxfordWiley-Blackwell201115917410.1002/9781118785041
     [Google Scholar]
  12. MaoH YangA PanY LiH LeiL Displacement in root apex and changes in incisor inclination affect alveolar bone remodeling in adult bimaxillary protrusion patients : A retrospective study.2020112
     [Google Scholar]
  13. MihalikC.A. ProffitW.R. PhillipsC. Long-term follow-up of class II adults treated with orthodontic camouflage: A comparison with orthognathic surgery outcomes.Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop.2003123326627810.1067/mod.2003.4312637899
     [Google Scholar]
  14. BaeS.M. KimH.J. KyungH.M. Long-term changes of the anterior palatal alveolar bone after treatment with bialveolar protrusion, evaluated with computed tomography.Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop.2018153110811710.1016/j.ajodo.2016.09.03429287637
     [Google Scholar]
  15. NguyenT. BaekE.S. HwangS. KimK-H. ChungC.J. Nonsurgical and nonprosthetic camouflage treatment of skeletal Class II open bite with bilaterally missing lower first molars.Angle Orthod.2019May;89350551730124320
     [Google Scholar]
  16. HongS.Y. ShinJ.W. HongC. ChanV. BaikU.B. KimY.H. ChaeH.S. Alveolar bone remodeling during maxillary incisor intrusion and retraction.Prog. Orthod.20192014710.1186/s40510‑019‑0300‑231867679
     [Google Scholar]
  17. AhnH.W. MoonS.C. BaekS.H. Morphometric evaluation of changes in the alveolar bone and roots of the maxillary anterior teeth before and after en masse retraction using cone-beam computed tomography.Angle Orthod.201383221222110.2319/041812‑325.123066654
     [Google Scholar]
  18. LinJ.C.Y. YehC.L. LiouE.J.W. BowmanS.J. Treatment of skeletal-origin gummy smiles with miniscrew anchorage.J. Clin. Orthod.200842528529618771123
     [Google Scholar]
  19. YodthongN. CharoemratroteC. LeethanakulC. Factors related to alveolar bone thickness during upper incisor retraction.Angle Orthod.201383339440110.2319/062912‑534.123043245
     [Google Scholar]
  20. ChungC.J. JangW. PiersC. LeeD.W. HwangS. KimK.H. ProffitW.R. NguyenT. Differential alveolar bone modeling after orthodontic retraction.J. Am. Dent. Assoc.2019150431332010.1016/j.adaj.2018.12.02930922461
     [Google Scholar]
  21. PicançoP.R.B. ValarelliF.P. CançadoR.H. de FreitasK.M.S. PicançoG.V. Comparison of the changes of alveolar bone thickness in maxillary incisor area in extraction and non-extraction cases: Computerized tomography evaluation.Dental Press J. Orthod.2013185919810.1590/S2176‑9451201300050001624352394
     [Google Scholar]
  22. GorbunkovaA. PagniG. BrizhakA. FarronatoG. RasperiniG. Impact of orthodontic treatment on periodontal tissues : A narrative review of multidisciplinary literature.Int. J. Dent.20162016472358910.1155/2016/472358926904120
     [Google Scholar]
  23. AtikE. Gorucu-CoskunerH. Akarsu-GuvenB. TanerT. Evaluation of changes in the maxillary alveolar bone after incisor intrusion.Korean J. Orthod.201848636737610.4041/kjod.2018.48.6.36730450329
     [Google Scholar]
  24. MelsenB. AllaisD. Factors of importance for the development of dehiscences during labial movement of mandibular incisors: A retrospective study of adult orthodontic patients.Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop.2005127555256110.1016/j.ajodo.2003.12.02615877035
     [Google Scholar]
  25. HandelmanC.S. The anterior alveolus: Its importance in limiting orthodontic treatment and its influence on the occurrence of iatrogenic sequelae.Angle Orthod.1996662951098712499
     [Google Scholar]
  26. YuJ.H. HuangH.L. LiuC.F. WuJ. LiY.F. TsaiM.T. HsuJ.T. Does orthodontic treatment affect the alveolar bone density?Medicine (Baltimore)20169510e308010.1097/MD.000000000000308026962841
     [Google Scholar]
  27. ThongudompornU. CharoemratroteC. JearapongpakornS. Changes of anterior maxillary alveolar bone thickness following incisor proclination and extrusion.Angle Orthod.201585454955410.2319/051614‑352.125208232
     [Google Scholar]
  28. GuoQ ZhangS LiuH WangC WeiF Three-dimensional evaluation of upper anterior alveolar bone dehiscence after incisor retraction and intrusion in adult patients with bimaxillary protrusion malocclusion.J Zhejiang Univ Sci B (Biomedicine Biotechnol.20111212990997
     [Google Scholar]
  29. SinghA. ChandraS. AgarwalD.K. BhattacharyaP. A study to evaluate the alveolar bone thickness during anterior retraction using computed tomography.Int J Contemp Med Res.20174510211026
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Domingo-ClériguesM. Montiel-CompanyJ.M. Almerich-SillaJ.M. García-SanzV. Paredes-GallardoV. Bellot-ArcísC. Changes in the alveolar bone thickness of maxillary incisors after orthodontic treatment involving extractions - A systematic review and meta-analysis.J. Clin. Exp. Dent.2019111e76e8410.4317/jced.5543430697398
     [Google Scholar]
  31. ZhangF. LeeS.C. LeeJ.B. LeeK.M. Geometric analysis of alveolar bone around the incisors after anterior retraction following premolar extraction.Angle Orthod.202090217318010.2319/041419‑266.131769701
     [Google Scholar]
  32. HwangC-J. MoonJ-L. The limitation of alveolar bone remodeling during retraction of the upper anterior teeth.Korean J. Orthod.200131197105
     [Google Scholar]
  33. GarlockD.T. BuschangP.H. AraujoE.A. BehrentsR.G. KimK.B. Evaluation of marginal alveolar bone in the anterior mandible with pretreatment and posttreatment computed tomography in nonextraction patients.Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop.2016149219220110.1016/j.ajodo.2015.07.03426827975
     [Google Scholar]
  34. MaJ HuangJ JiangJ Morphological analysis of the alveolar bone of the anterior teeth in severe high-angle skeletal Class II and Class III malocclusions assessed with cone-beam computed tomography.201911310.1371/journal.pone.0210461
     [Google Scholar]
  35. ProffitW.R. The biologic basis of orthodontic therapy.Contemporary Orthodontic4th MissouriMosby Elsevier2007332335
     [Google Scholar]
  36. MischK.A. YiE.S. SarmentD.P. Accuracy of cone beam computed tomography for periodontal defect measurements.J. Periodontol.20067771261126610.1902/jop.2006.05036716805691
     [Google Scholar]
  37. NahmK.Y. KangJ.H. MoonS.C. ChoiY.S. KookY.A. KimS.H. HuangJ. Alveolar bone loss around incisors in Class I bidentoalveolar protrusion patients: A retrospective three-dimensional cone beam CT study.Dentomaxillofac. Radiol.201241648148810.1259/dmfr/3084540222184474
     [Google Scholar]
  38. GaribD.G. CalilL.R. LealC.R. JansonG. Is there a consensus for CBCT use in Orthodontics?Dental Press J. Orthod.201419513614910.1590/2176‑9451.19.5.136‑149.sar25715727
     [Google Scholar]
  39. SendykM. LinharesD.S. PannutiC.M. PaivaJ.B. Rino NetoJ. Effect of orthodontic treatment on alveolar bone thickness in adults: A systematic review.Dental Press J. Orthod.2019244344510.1590/2177‑6709.24.4.034‑045.oar31508705
     [Google Scholar]
  40. SonE.J. KimS.J. HongC. ChanV. SimH.Y. JiS. HongS.Y. BaikU.B. ShinJ.W. KimY.H. ChaeH.S. A study on the morphologic change of palatal alveolar bone shape after intrusion and retraction of maxillary incisors.Sci. Rep.20201011445410.1038/s41598‑020‑71115‑632879338
     [Google Scholar]
  41. TianY.L. LiuF. SunH.J. LvP. CaoY.M. YuM. YueY. Alveolar bone thickness around maxillary central incisors of different inclination assessed with cone-beam computed tomography.Korean J. Orthod.201545524525210.4041/kjod.2015.45.5.24526445719
     [Google Scholar]
  42. AyazM. KharbandaO.P. Successful treatment of Class II malocclusion with bidental protrusion using standard edgewise prescription.Contemp. Clin. Dent.201671757810.4103/0976‑237X.17711127041906
     [Google Scholar]
  43. KimK. ChoiS. ChoiE. ChoiY. HwangC. Unpredictability of soft tissue changes after camouflage treatment of Class II division 1 malocclusion with maximum anterior retraction using miniscrews.Angle Orthod.201787223023810.2319/042516‑332.127768390
     [Google Scholar]
  44. VardimonA.D. OrenE. Ben-BassatY. Cortical bone remodeling/tooth movement ratio during maxillary incisor retraction with tip versus torque movements.Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop.1998114552052910.1016/S0889‑5406(98)70172‑69810048
     [Google Scholar]
  45. KuoT-Y. KuoC-L. Nonsurgical correction of skeletal class III malocclusion with evident profile change in an adult patient with functional shift and low mandibular plane angle.Taiwan J Orthod.2020322113125
     [Google Scholar]
  46. ChaitanyaA.S.K. ReddyY.M. SreekanthC. ReddyB.V. KumarB.L. RajG.K.P. Orthodontic tooth movements and its effects on periodontium.Int J Dent Med Res.201414119123
     [Google Scholar]
  47. NandaR. UpadhyayM. Skeletal and dental considerations in orthodontic treatment mechanics: A contemporary view.Eur. J. Orthod.201335563464310.1093/ejo/cjs05424068287
     [Google Scholar]
  48. MasperoC. GaffuriF. CastroI.O. LanteriV. UgoliniA. FarronatoM. Correlation between dental vestibular-palatal inclination and alveolar bone remodeling after orthodontic treatment: A CBCT analysis.Materials (Basel)2019122411110.3390/ma1224422531888251
     [Google Scholar]
  49. BajracharyaM. Analysis of maxillary bone thickness at incisor area in class II division 1 malocclusion.Orthod J Nepal.201311424610.3126/ojn.v1i1.9366
     [Google Scholar]
  50. KapilaS. ConleyR.S. HarrellW.E.Jr The current status of cone beam computed tomography imaging in orthodontics.Dentomaxillofac. Radiol.2011401243410.1259/dmfr/1261564521159912
     [Google Scholar]
  51. Joss-VassalliI. GrebensteinC. TopouzelisN. SculeanA. KatsarosC. Orthodontic therapy and gingival recession: A systematic review.Orthod. Craniofac. Res.201013312714110.1111/j.1601‑6343.2010.01491.x20618715
     [Google Scholar]
  52. YaredK.F.G. ZenobioE.G. PachecoW. Periodontal status of mandibular central incisors after orthodontic proclination in adults.Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop.200613016.e16.e810.1016/j.ajodo.2006.01.01516849063
     [Google Scholar]
  53. SockalingamS.N.M.P. ZakariaA.S.I. KhanK.A.M. AzmiF.M. NoorN.M. Simple orthodontic correction of rotated malpositioned teeth using sectional wire and 2 × 4 orthodontic appliances in mixed- dentition: A report of two cases.Case Rep. Dent.20202020697219610.1155/2020/697219632695527
     [Google Scholar]
  54. MelsenB. Biological reaction of alveolar bone to orthodontic tooth movement.Angle Orthod.199969215115810227556
     [Google Scholar]
  55. MasperoC. AbateA. BellincioniF. CavagnettoD. LanteriV. CostaA. FarronatoM. Comparison of a tridimensional cephalometric analysis performed on 3T-MRI compared with CBCT: A pilot study in adults.Prog. Orthod.20192014010.1186/s40510‑019‑0293‑x31631241
     [Google Scholar]
  56. HacopianN. Morphological changes in alveolar bone following orthodontic space closure. Loma Linda Univ Electron Theses.Diss Proj.2015318147
     [Google Scholar]
  57. RamanathanC HofmanZ Root resorption in relation to orthodontic tooth movement.Acta Medica (Hradec Kral.2006492919510.14712/18059694.2017.117
     [Google Scholar]
  58. YagciA. VeliI. UysalT. UcarF.I. OzerT. EnhosS. Dehiscence and fenestration in skeletal Class I, II, and III malocclusions assessed with cone-beam computed tomography.Angle Orthod.2012821677410.2319/040811‑250.121696298
     [Google Scholar]
  59. WehrbeinH BauerW DiedrichP Mandibular incisors, alveolar bone, and symphysis after orthodontic treatment . A retrospective study.Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop.1996239246
     [Google Scholar]
  60. WehrbeinH. FuhrmannR.A.W. DiedrichP.R. Human histologic tissue response after long-term orthodontic tooth movement.Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop.1995107436037110.1016/S0889‑5406(95)70088‑97709900
     [Google Scholar]
  61. LiY. JacoxL.A. LittleS.H. KoC.C. Orthodontic tooth movement: The biology and clinical implications.Kaohsiung J. Med. Sci.201834420721410.1016/j.kjms.2018.01.00729655409
     [Google Scholar]
  62. ShengY. GuoH-M. BaiY-X. LiS. Dehiscence and fenestration in anterior teeth : Comparison before and after orthodontic treatment.J. Orofac. Orthop.20208111910.1007/s00056‑019‑00196‑431646344
     [Google Scholar]
  63. SunL. YuanL. WangB. ZhangL. ShenG. FangB. Changes of alveolar bone dehiscence and fenestration after augmented corticotomy-assisted orthodontic treatment: A CBCT evaluation.Prog. Orthod.2019201710.1186/s40510‑019‑0259‑z30773604
     [Google Scholar]
  64. WainwrightW.M. Faciolingual tooth movement: Its influence on the root and cortical plate.Am. J. Orthod.197364327830210.1016/0002‑9416(73)90021‑34199008
     [Google Scholar]
  65. PuttaravuttipornP. WongsuwanlertM. CharoemratroteC. LeethanakulC. Volumetric evaluation of root resorption on the upper incisors using cone beam computed tomography after 1 year of orthodontic treatment in adult patients with marginal bone loss.Angle Orthod.201888671071810.2319/121717‑868.129911905
     [Google Scholar]
  66. FelicitaA.S. Quantification of intrusive/retraction force and moment generated during en-masse retraction of maxillary anterior teeth using mini-implants: A conceptual approach.Dental Press J. Orthod.2017225475510.1590/2177‑6709.22.5.047‑055.oar29160344
     [Google Scholar]
  67. UpadhyayM. YadavS. PatilS. Mini-implant anchorage for en- masse retraction of maxillary anterior teeth: A clinical cephalometric study.Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop.2008134680381010.1016/j.ajodo.2006.10.02519061808
     [Google Scholar]
  68. LeeJ.E. JungC.Y. KimY. KookY.A. KoY. ParkJ.B. Analysis of alveolar bone morphology of the maxillary central and lateral incisors with normal occlusion.Medicina (Kaunas)201955911010.3390/medicina5509056531484416
     [Google Scholar]
  69. RibeiroG.L.U. JacobH.B. Understanding the basis of space closure in Orthodontics for a more efficient orthodontic treatment.Dental Press J. Orthod.201621211512510.1590/2177‑6709.21.2.115‑125.sar27275623
     [Google Scholar]
  70. BarretoG.M. FeitosaH.O. Iatrogenics in orthodontics and its challenges.Dental Press J. Orthod.201621511412510.1590/2177‑6709.21.5.114‑125.sar27901237
     [Google Scholar]
  71. JustusR. Iatrogenic effects of orthodontic treatment - Decision-making in prevention, diagnosis, and treatment (2015).Eur. J. Orthod.201537667110.1093/ejo/cjv060
     [Google Scholar]
  72. ChadwickS. Iatrogenic effects of orthodontic treatment: Decision-making in prevention, diagnosis and treatment.J. Orthod.20164318510.1080/14653125.2016.114322627159366
     [Google Scholar]
  73. OliveiraT.M.F. ClaudinoL.V. MattosC.T. Sant’AnnaE.F. Maxillary dentoalveolar assessment following retraction of maxillary incisors: A preliminary study.Dental Press J. Orthod.2016215828910.1590/2177‑6709.21.5.082‑089.oar27901233
     [Google Scholar]
  74. FuhrmannR.A.W. WehrbeinH. LangenH.J. DiedrichP.R. Assessment of the dentate alveolar process with high resolution computed tomography.Dentomaxillofac. Radiol.1995241505410.1259/dmfr.24.1.85939098593909
     [Google Scholar]
  75. PatcasR. MüllerL. UllrichO. PeltomäkiT. Accuracy of cone-beam computed tomography at different resolutions assessed on the bony covering of the mandibular anterior teeth.Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop.20121411415010.1016/j.ajodo.2011.06.03422196184
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/cdent/10.2174/2542579X03666210616150715
Loading
Anterior Labial Alveolar Bone Thickness after Orthodontic Retraction of Anterior Teeth
Curr. Dentistry 3, 60 (2021); https://doi.org/10.2174/2542579X03666210616150715
/content/journals/cdent/10.2174/2542579X03666210616150715
/content/journals/cdent/10.2174/2542579X03666210616150715
Loading

Data & Media loading...


  • Article Type:     Research Article
Keyword(s): alveolar; anterior; bone; class II malocclusion; retraction; Skeletal

Most Cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error
Please enter a valid_number test