The korean journal of orthodontics (대한치과교정학회지)

The Korean Association Of Orthodontists (대한치과교정학회)
권호 표지

Change in arch width in extraction vs nonextraction treatment

발치 및 비발치 치료 전후 악궁 폭경의 변화

  • Jeon, Ji-Yun (Department of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, Kyung Hee University) ;
  • Kim, Su-Jung (Department of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, Kyung Hee University) ;
  • Kang, Seung-Goo (Department of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, Kyung Hee University) ;
  • Park, Young-Guk (Department of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, Kyung Hee University)
  • 전지윤 (경희대학교 치의학전문대학원 교정학교실) ;
  • 김수정 (경희대학교 치의학전문대학원 교정학교실) ;
  • 강승구 (경희대학교 치의학전문대학원 교정학교실) ;
  • 박영국 (경희대학교 치의학전문대학원 교정학교실)
  • Published : 2007.02.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective: This study was performed to investigate the influences of extraction and nonextraction treatment on smile esthetics by measuring dental arch width changes. Methods: Pretreatment and posttreatment study models of 30 first premolar extraction cases and 30 nonextraction cases were randomly selected to determine whether extraction treatment results in narrow dental arches, and a consequent unaesthetic smile. Arch widths were measured from the cusp tips of the canines and the first molars. Posterior arch widths were also measured at a constant arch depth derived by averaging randomly chosen nonextraction models. Results: The intercanine widths increased significantly in the extraction sample, whereas the intermolar widths decreased significantly. The arch width at a standardized arch depth was significantly wider in the extraction subjects. Conclusion: These results elucidate that constriction in arch width is not a materialized consequence of extraction treatment. It leads to postulate that an esthetically compromising effect from narrow dental arches on smile is hardly anticipated with extraction treatment.

일반적으로 네 개의 소구치 발치를 동반한 교정치료는 비발치 치료에 비하여 치열궁 폭경을 더 좁게 만들어, 미소시 구각 부위에 어두운 구강 내 공간, 소위 buccal corridor를 형성함으로써 비심미적인 결과를 낳는다는 견해가 있다. 한편 발치 치료는 오히려 하악의 견치간 폭경을 증가시키며, 비발치 치료와 비교하여 악궁 폭경의 변화에 있어 유의한 차이를 보이지 않는다는 상반된 연구결과가 존재한다. 이 연구는 발치 치료와 비발치 치료 시 악궁 폭경의 변화를 관찰하여 실제적으로 발치 치료가 미소 시 협측 분절에 미치는 영향을 규명하고자 시행되었다. 경희대학교 치과병원 교정과에서 치료받은 환자 중 전악에 고정식 장치를 사용하여 네 개의 제1소구치 발치 치료를 받은 30명과 비발치로 치료한 30명의 치료 전후 연구 모형을 비교 분석한 결과 악궁 폭경의 변화는 다음과 같다. 네 개의 제1소구치 발치 치료 시 비발치 치료와 비교하여 상악의 견치간 폭경 변화는 유의한 차이가 없었으나, 하악의 견치간 폭경은 유의하게 더 많이 증가하였다. 구치간 폭경 변화는 상악과 하악 치열궁 모두에서 두 군 간에 유의한 차이가 나타났는데 발치군에서 구치간 폭경이 감소한 반면에 비발치군에서는 구치간 폭경이 증가하였다. 미소시 노출되는 악궁 폭경은 비발치군보다 발치군에서 더 크게 나타났으며, 이는 치열궁 폭경의 축소가 발치 치료 시 당연히 예상되는 결과가 아님을 시사한다.

Keywords

References

  1. Angle EH. Treatment of malocclusion of the teeth and fhctures of the maxillae. 7th ed. Philadelphia: SS White Manufacturing; 1907
  2. Strang RHW. A textbook of orthodontia. Ist ed. Philadelphia, Pa: Lea & Febiger; 1933
  3. Case CS. The question of extraction in orthodontia. Am J Orthod 1964;50:660-91 https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(64)90106-X
  4. Grieve GW. Analysis of malocclusion based upon the forward translation theory. Am J Orthod Oral Surg 1941;27:323-8 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0096-6347(41)90521-5
  5. Grieve GW. Anatomical and clinical problems involved where extraction is indicated in orthodontic treatment. Am J Orthod Oral Surg 1944;30:437-43 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0096-6347(44)90040-2
  6. Tweed CH. The application of the principles of the edgewise arch in the treatment of malocclusions. Angle Orthod 1941;11:5-67
  7. Tweed CH. Indications for extraction of teeth in orthodontic procedure. Am J Orthod Oral Surg 1944;30:22-45
  8. Creekmore TD. Inhibition or stimulation of the vertical growth of the facial complex, its significance to treatment. Angle Orthod 1967;37: 285-97
  9. Poulton DR. The influence of extraoral traction. Am J Orthod 1967;53:8-18 https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(67)90135-2
  10. Kuhn W. Control of anterior vertical dimension and proper selection of extraoral anchorage. Angle Orthod 1968;38:340-9
  11. Harvold EP, Vargervik K. Morphogenetic response to activator treatment. Am J Orthod 1971;60:478-90 https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(71)90114-X
  12. Pfeiffer JP, Grobety D. Simultaneous use of cervical appliance and activator: an orthopedic approach to fixed appliance therapy. Am J Orthod 1972;61:353-73 https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(72)90300-4
  13. Frankel R Decrowdmg during eruption under the screening influence of vestibular shields. Am J Orthod 1974;65:372-406 https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(74)90271-1
  14. Buonocore MG. Principles of adhesive retention and adhesive restorative materials. J Am Dent Assoc 1963;67:382-91 https://doi.org/10.14219/jada.archive.1963.0301
  15. Miura F, Nakagawa K, Masuhara E. New direct bonding system for plastic brackets. Am J Orthod 1971;59:350-61 https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(71)90231-4
  16. Cueto HI. A little bit of history: the first direct bonding in orthodontia. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1990;98:276-7 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-5406(05)81606-3
  17. Brodie AG. Does scientific investigation support the extraction of teeth in orthodontic treatment? Am J Orthod Oral Surg 1944;30:449-60
  18. Pollock HC. The extraction debate of 1911 by Case, Dewey, and Cryer. Am J Orthod 1964;50:656-91 https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(64)90105-8
  19. Baumrind S, Korn EL, Boyd RL, Maxwell R. The decision to extract: Part I-intercliniciau agreement. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1996;109:297-309 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-5406(96)70153-1
  20. Witzig JW, Spahl RJ. The clinical management of basic maxillofacial orthopedic appliances. Vol 1. Mechanics. Littleton ,Ma: PSG Publishing Co; 1987. p. 1-13
  21. Dierkes JM. The beauty of the face: an orthodontic perspective. J Am Dent Assoc 1987;Spec No:89E-95E
  22. Johnson DK, Smith RJ. Smile esthetics after orthodontic treatment with and without extraction of four first premolars. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1995;108: 162-7 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-5406(95)70079-X
  23. Kim E, Gianelly AA. Extraction vs nonextraction: arch widths and smile esthetics. Angle Orthod 2003;73:354-8
  24. Hulsey CM. An esthetic evaluation of lip-teeth relationships present in the smile. Am J Orthod 1970;57:132-44 https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(70)90260-5
  25. Paquette DE, Beattie JR Johnston LE Jr. A long-term comparison of nonextraction and premolar extraction edgewise therapy in 'borderline' Class II patients. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1992;102:1-14 https://doi.org/10.1016/0889-5406(92)70009-Y
  26. Luppanapomlarp S, Johnston LE Jr. The effects of premolarextraction: a long-term comparison of outcomes in 'clear-cut' extraction and nonextraction Class II patients. Angle Orthod 1993;63: 257-72
  27. Mackley RJ. An evaluation of smiles before and after orthodontic treatment. Angle Orthod 1993;63: 183-9
  28. Kokich VO Jr, Kiyak HA, Shapiro PA. Comparing the perception of dentists and lay people to altered dental esthetics. J Esthet Dent 1999;11:311-24 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1708-8240.1999.tb00414.x
  29. Sarver DM. The importance of incisor positioning in the esthetic smile: the smile arc. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2001;120:98-111 https://doi.org/10.1067/mod.2001.114301
  30. Sarver DM. Ackerman MB. Dynamic smile visualization and quantification: Part 2. Smile analysis and treatment strategies. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2003;124:116-27 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-5406(03)00307-X
  31. Tjan AH, Miller GD, The JG. Some esthetic factors in a smile. J Prosthet Dent 1984;51 :24-8 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(84)80097-9
  32. Dunn WJ, Murchison DF, Broome JC. Esthetics: patients' perceptions of dental attractiveness. J Prosthodont 1996;5:166-71 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-849X.1996.tb00292.x
  33. Turpin DL. Editor's Choice. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2006;130:A12 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.09.023
  34. Dahlberg G. Statistical methods for medical and biological students. London: George Allen and Unwin Ltd; 1940. p. 122-32
  35. Gianelly AA. Arch width after extraction and nonextraction treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2003;123:25-8 https://doi.org/10.1067/mod.2003.57
  36. Bishara SE, Cummins DM, Zaher AR. Treatment and posttreatment changes in patients with Class II Division I malocclusion after extraction and nonextraction treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1997;111:18-27 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-5406(97)70297-X