Arisha Izhar; Gurkeerat Singh; Varun Goyal; Rajkumar Singh; Nishant Gupta; Prerna Pahuja
Abstract
Objectives: The objective of this clinical study was to assess the predicted treatment outcome and actual treatment outcome and compare the models of both the groups so as to evaluate the efficacy of tooth movement with clear aligner.
Methods: The sample size included 10 cases with mild anterior crowding ...
Read More
Objectives: The objective of this clinical study was to assess the predicted treatment outcome and actual treatment outcome and compare the models of both the groups so as to evaluate the efficacy of tooth movement with clear aligner.
Methods: The sample size included 10 cases with mild anterior crowding treated with aligner therapy. The predicted software models were superimposed on the Clinical STL models at various stages by using MeshLab software (Developed at the Visual Computing Lab at ISTI-CNR with the support of the 3D-co-form project).The predicted software models showing orthodontic tooth movement was compared with the actual movement achieved clinically. Results: The results of this study have shown that when a comparison was made on the basis of irregularity scores in both the groups, it was seen that the irregularity score was more in Clinical STL group at each stage such as 2.55 at T4, 1.65 at T6 and 1.0 at T8 whereas 2.0 at T4. 0.90 at T6 and 0.25 at T8 in the Software model group. Also, on comparing mean accuracy these three stages, the analysis of data showed the mean accuracy at T4 is 62.5%, mean accuracy at T6 is 68.8% and the mean accuracy at T8 is 78.1%.
Conclusions: The predicted software models do not accurately reflect the patient’s tooth position .There is an overestimation by predicted software as compared to the actual achieved tooth position. There is a need of overcorrection to be built in the treatment planning stage itself and execution of the anticipated end result.
Vishal Bharadwaj; Gurkeerat Singh; Sridhar Kannan; Raj Kumar Singh; Ashish Gupta; Gaurav Gupta; Abhishek Goyal
Abstract
Background: Non-extraction treatment protocols are better accepted by patients as well as clinicians. Among the techniques and mechanics with the potential to facilitate non-extraction treatment includes headgears, fixed sagittal correctors, transverse expansion screws and self-ligating systems.Objectives: ...
Read More
Background: Non-extraction treatment protocols are better accepted by patients as well as clinicians. Among the techniques and mechanics with the potential to facilitate non-extraction treatment includes headgears, fixed sagittal correctors, transverse expansion screws and self-ligating systems.Objectives: To evaluate the intra-arch dimensional changes in moderate crowding cases, treated non-extraction with a passive self-ligating (Damon 3MX) appliance using digitized models and lateral cephalograms.Methods: A total of 20 patients (age group of 15 - 18 years) who had undergone non extraction orthodontic treatment with the Damon 3MX appliance were selected. All the pre-treatment and post-treatment dental stone models of maxillary and mandibular arches were scanned using 3D digital scanner (Maestro 3D, Greatlakes, USA) and were converted into digital models. Various parameters undertaken were measured digitally on the computer in millimetres. Cephalometric tracings of pre and post treatment cephalograms were performed using digital cephalometrics (Nemo Ceph, version 6.0, Spain). Statistical analysis was performed using t-test. Results: More transverse expansion was observed in the region of 1st and 2nd premolars as compared to the inter-canine and inter molar region in maxillary and mandibular arch. However a decrease in arch depth was observed in maxillary arch but arch depth of mandibular arch was found to be increased. There was significant increase in anterior proclination in both maxillary and mandibular arches.Conclusions: Passive self-ligating system causes a significant increase in transverse width in both maxillary and mandibular dental arches.
