• Journal of the korean academy of Pediatric Dentistry
• /
• v.40 no.1
• /
• pp.48-52
• /
• 2013

Ectopic eruption of the first permanent molar is an abnormal positioning of this tooth, causing a premature resorption of the distal surface of the second primary molar. It occurs in approximately 3~4% of the population and the maxillary arch is usually affected. While 66% of ectopically erupting permanent molars are corrected spontaneously without treatment (i.e. a reversible type), active treatment is necessary for irreversible ectopic eruption cases. The treatment modalities have been divided into two categories: interproximal wedging and distal tipping. Interproximal wedging is indicated for minimal impaction and when the impaction is severe, distal tipping techniques are required. Although much has been written about treatment modalities on unilateral ectopic eruption of the first permanent molar, few reports mention bilateral ectopic eruption cases. In this report, two cases of bilateral ectopic eruption of the first permanent molars in young patients are presented. We describe the use of a modified bilateral Halterman appliance for correction of these cases and the clinical results were satisfactory.

• The korean journal of orthodontics
• /
• v.31 no.6 s.89
• /
• pp.549-558
• /
• 2001

This study was undertaken to demonstrate the forces in the maxillary alveolar bone generated by the activation of the maxillary posterior crossbite appliance In the treatment of posterior buccal crossbite caused by buccal ectopic eruption of the maxillary second molar. A photoelastic model was fabricated using a Photoelastic material (PL-3) to simulate alveolar bone and ivory-colored resin teeth. The model was observed throughout the anterior and posterior view in a circular polariscope and recorded photographically before and after activation of the maxillary posterior crossbite appliance. The following conclusions were reached from this investigation : 1. When the traction force was applied on the palatal surface of the second molar, stresses were concentrated at the buccal and palatal root apices and alveolar crest area. The axis of rotation of palatal root was at the root apex and that of the buccal root was at the root li4 area. In this result, palatal tipping and rotating force were generated. 2. When the traction force was applied on the buccal surface of the second molar, more stresses than loading on the palatal surface were observed in the palatal and buccal root apices. Furthermore, the heavier stresses creating an intrusive force and controlled tipping force were recorded below the buccal and palatal root apices below the palatal root surface. In addition, the axis of rotation of palatal root disappeared whereas the rotation axis of the buccal root moved to the root apex from the apical 1/4 area. 3. When the traction force was simultaneously applied on the maxillary right and left second molars, the stress intensity around the maxillary first molar root area was greater than the stress generated by the only buccal traction of the maxillary right or left second molar. As in above mentioned results, we should realize that force application on the palatal surface of second molars with the maxillary posterior crossbite appliance Produced rotation of the second molar and palatal traction, which nay cause occlusal Interference. That is to say, we have to escape the rotation and uncontrolled tipping creating occlusal interference when correcting buccal posterior crossbite. For this purpose, we recommend buccal traction rather than palatal traction force on the second molar.