• The korean journal of orthodontics
• /
• v.48 no.3
• /
• pp.172-181
• /
• 2018

Objective: This study was performed to investigate buccal facial depth (BFD) changes after extraction and nonextraction orthodontic treatments in post-adolescent and adult female patients, and to explore possible influencing factors. Methods: Twelve and nine female patients were enrolled in the extraction and nonextraction groups, respectively. Changes in BFD in the defined buccal region and six transverse and two coronal measuring planes were measured after registering pretreatment and posttreatment three-dimensional facial scans. Changes in posterior dentoalveolar arch widths were also measured. Treatment duration, changes in body mass index (BMI), and cephalometric variables were compared between the groups. Results: BFD in the buccal region decreased by approximately 1.45 mm in the extraction group, but no significant change was observed in the nonextraction group. In the extraction group, the decrease in BFD was identical between the two coronal measuring planes, whereas this differed among the six transverse measuring planes. Posterior dentoalveolar arch widths decreased in the extraction group, whereas these increased at the second premolar level in the nonextraction group. The treatment duration of the extraction group was twice that of the nonextraction group. No differences were found in BMI and Frankfort horizontal-mandibular plane angle changes between the groups. BFD changes in the buccal region moderately correlated with treatment duration and dental arch width change. Conclusions: BFD decreased in adult female patients undergoing extraction, and this may be influenced by the long treatment duration and constriction of dentoalveolar arch width. However, nonextraction treatment did not significantly alter BFD.

• The korean journal of orthodontics
• /
• v.50 no.2
• /
• pp.120-128
• /
• 2020

Objective: The aims of the present study were to evaluate the changes in the maximum lip-closing force (MLF) after orthodontic treatment with or without premolar extractions and verify the correlation of these changes with dentoskeletal changes. Methods: In total, 17 women who underwent nonextraction orthodontic treatment and 15 women who underwent orthodontic treatment with extraction of all four first premolars were included in this retrospective study. For all patients, lateral cephalograms and dental models were measured before (T0) and after (T1) treatment. In addition, MLF was measured at both time points using the Lip De Cum LDC-110R^® device. Statistical analyses were performed to evaluate changes in clinical variables and MLF and their correlations. Results: Both groups showed similar skeletal patterns, although the extraction group showed greater proclination of the maxillary and mandibular incisors and lip protrusion compared to the nonextraction group at T0. MLF at T0 was comparable between the two groups. The reduction in the arch width and depth and incisor retroclination from T0 to T1 were more pronounced in the extraction group than in the nonextraction group. MLF in the extraction group significantly increased during the treatment period, and this increase was significantly greater than that in the nonextraction group. The increase in MLF was found to be correlated with the increase in the interincisal angle and decrease in the intermolar width, arch depth, and incisor-mandibular plane angle. Conclusions: This study suggests that MLF increases to a greater extent during extraction orthodontic treatment than during nonextraction orthodontic treatment.

• The Journal of the Korean dental association
• /
• v.57 no.6
• /
• pp.326-332
• /
• 2019

Extraction treatment has been used for a long time to treat crowding or lip protrusion patients and still extraction decision is the most difficult and important decision during diagnosis and treatment planning. If the amount of crowidng is severe, premolar extraction is often considered. Because of their location, premolar extractions would seem to allow for the most straightforward relief of crowding and the improvement of soft tissue profile. But patients and their parents often prefer nonextraction approach if possible and such a preference gives us serious question about the boundary of nonextraction treatment. Because Orthodontic Mini-Implant (OMI) become popular these days, distalization of posterior teeth can be obtained easily without patient's compliance. For this reason, many orthodontists are trying to treat crowding patient with nonextraction than before. But sometime, unexpected side effects are observed including unesthetic profile, impaction of second molar and long treatment time. All the tools for space gaining - extraction, arch expansion, molar distalization and interproximal enamel reduction - have their limitations and indications. Possible side effects and limitations should be carefully considered during the treatment planning. Although Korean patients usually require extraction more often than US or European patients, more knowledge about the tools for space gaining would help us to decrease the rate of extraction and the problems during treatment of crowding patients.

• Journal of Dental Rehabilitation and Applied Science
• /
• v.29 no.2
• /
• pp.119-126
• /
• 2013

The concept of extraction in orthodontic treatment has been changed many times. Even today, criteria of extraction or nonextraction is still changing. In this study, changes depending on the evaluator's perception of treatment outcomes were compared in both extraction and nonextraction cases. In this study, premolar extracted 59 patients and nonextracted 60 patients, totally 119 patients who finished orthodontic treatment in Dankook University Dental Hospital orthodontic clinic were enrolled. Evaluation sections made up of specialists and laypersons assessed soft tissue traced from lateral cephalometric radiographs with visual analogue scale before and after the treatment. And the results were statistically analyzed. Thus, the conclusions drawn are as follows: 1. Average score is 5.76 in extraction, which is larger than 5.28 of nonextraction case. Improvement of facial profile was more favorably accepted in extraction case. 2. 5.875 in the group of specialists were higher evaluation than 5.165 in the group of layperson. 3. Specialists gave significantly higher ratings in the extraction than nonextraction. 4. A higher rating in extraction case of the layperson group has no significant difference with nonextraction case. 5. Nonextraction patients were given higher ratings from specialist group. 6. A higher rating of specialist group in extraction case has no significant difference with layperson group.

• The korean journal of orthodontics
• /
• v.46 no.5
• /
• pp.280-289
• /
• 2016

Objective: The aim of this study was to analyze tooth movement and arch width changes in maxillary dentition following nonextraction treatment with orthodontic mini-implant (OMI) anchorage in Class II division 1 malocclusions. Methods: Seventeen adult patients diagnosed with Angle's Class II division 1 malocclusion were treated by nonextraction with OMIs as anchorage for distalization of whole maxillary dentition. Three-dimensional virtual maxillary models were superimposed with the best-fit method at the pretreatment and post-treatment stages. Linear, angular, and arch width variables were measured using Rapidform 2006 software, and analyzed by the paired t -test. Results: All maxillary teeth showed statistically significant movement posteriorly (p < 0.05). There were no significant changes in the vertical position of the maxillary teeth, except that the second molars were extruded (0.86 mm, p < 0.01). The maxillary first and second molars were rotated distal-in ($4.5^{\circ}$, p < 0.001; $3.0^{\circ}$, p < 0.05, respectively). The intersecond molar width increased slightly (0.1 mm, p > 0.05) and the intercanine, interfirst premolar, intersecond premolar, and interfirst molar widths increased significantly (2.2 mm, p < 0.01; 2.2 mm, p < 0.05; 1.9 mm, p < 0.01; 2.0 mm, p < 0.01; respectively). Conclusions: Nonextraction treatment with OMI anchorage for Class II division 1 malocclusions could retract the whole maxillary dentition to achieve a Class I canine and molar relationship without a change in the vertical position of the teeth; however, the second molars were significantly extruded. Simultaneously, the maxillary arch was shown to be expanded with distal-in rotation of the molars.

• The korean journal of orthodontics
• /
• v.37 no.1 s.120
• /
• pp.65-72
• /
• 2007

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.

• The korean journal of orthodontics
• /
• v.31 no.2 s.85
• /
• pp.187-197
• /
• 2001

The change of the vertical dimension is of fundamental importance to the orthodontist. However, the choice between the two methods of treatment, extraction versus nonextraction, is not clear. It is not verified that the extraction method decreases vertical dimension, or nonextraction methods result in an increase in vertical dimension. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the changes of vertical dimension of face after the orthodontic treatment with standard edgewise technique, and to compare them in relation to facial types and bicuspid extraction. The subjects consisted of 165 orthodontic patients (77 of adolescents, 88 of adults), and was divided into vertical nonextraction (VN) group, vertical extraction (VE) group, horizontal nonextraction (HN) group, horizontal extraction (HE) group. Pre-and Post-treatment cephalograms were taken with standard method, traced, and digitized for each subject. The comparison of the measurements were statistically executed with Student's t-test. The results were as follows : 1. The facial height and molar height were increased after orthodontic treatment in the all groups. 2. No significant difference was found in the facial height change between the vertical and horizontal groups. 3. No significant difference was found in the facial height change between the extraction and nonextraction groups. 4. As the upper molars were extruded in adolescents group and lower molars were extruded in adults group, lower anterior facial height (LAFH) was increased. 5. None of the pretreatment variables correlates to the change of lower anterior facial height (LAFH).

• 대한치과교정학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 1997.11a
• /
• pp.39.1-39.1
• /
• 1997

• 대한치과교정학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 2003.10a
• /
• pp.101.2-101.2
• /
• 2003

• Journal of Oral Medicine and Pain
• /
• v.34 no.3
• /
• pp.277-294
• /
• 2009

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the soft tissue changes of class II adolescents and adults in respect to extraction or nonextraction. The study included 68 patients from Wonkwang Dental Hospital were categorized to adolescent extraction group, adolescent nonextraction group, adult extraction group, adult nonextraction group. Cephalometric tracing of each patient was done to compare pretreatment and posttreatment of each group, to compare the changes between groups. And among the variables that showed significancy, correlation analysis and simple linear regression were done. The results were as follows. 1. In both adolescents and adults after extraction treatment, nasolabial angle significantly increased and in both subjects after non extraction treatment, nasolabial angle significantly decreased. 2. In extraction subjects, there were positive correlation between the amount of treatment changes of vertical-U1 and E line-upper lip, the changes of vertical-L1 and E line-lower lip, the changes of vertical-L1 and vertical-Li. 3. In extraction subjects, simple regression equations of E line-upper lip, E line-lower lip, Li were calculated by regression analysis. According to the results above, it could be considered that the effect of the extraction or nonextraction treatment was greater than the effect of growth.