3D cephalometric assessment of bone tissue condition during the orthodontic treatment with clear aligners
https://doi.org/10.33925/1683-3031-2021-22-1-58-62
Abstract
Relevance. Modern studies about orthodontic correction with aligners and brackets focus on the three-dimensional assessment of bone and periodontal structures.
Purpose. The study aimed to develop a technique for the three-dimensional evaluation of bone tissue in orthodontic patients with aligners.
Materials and methods. Using our methodology, we evaluated the buccal and lingual bone thickness at the lower incisors, alveolar bone thickness, buccal and lingual width and height of the mandibular symphysis.
Results. Six months after the beginning of the orthodontic treatment with aligners, the study determined an increase in bone thickness bilaterally and the sharpness of buccal and lingual bone structure.
Conclusion. Treatment planning in patients is only possible using 3D cephalometry with complete visualization of tooth position in the bone and according to the roots of the adjacent teeth.
About the Authors
M. A. Danilova
Perm State Medical University named after E.A. Vagner
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Marina A. Danilova - DMD, PhD, DSc, Professor, Head of the Department of Pediatric Dentistry and Orthodontics, Vagner Perm State Medical University.
Perm.
I. V. Dmitrienko
Perm State Medical University named after E.A. Vagner
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Irina V. Dmitrienko - DMD, external PhD student, Department of Pediatric Dentistry and Orthodontics, Vagner Perm State Medical University.
Perm.
L. I. Arutyunyan
Perm State Medical University named after E.A. Vagner
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Larisa I. Arutyunyan - DMD, PhD, Associate Professor, Department of Pediatric Dentistry and Orthodontics, Vagner Perm State Medical University.
Perm.
References
1. Gvozdeva LM, Danilova MA, Alexandrova LI, Dmitrienko IV. The results of orthodontic treatment using aligners from the perspective of quality of life of patients with dentoalveolar anomalies. Dentistry = Stomatologiia. 2021;100(2):73-75.( In Russ.). doi:10.17116/stomat202110002173
2. Antosik RM. The analysis of the effectiveness of orthodontic treatment of patients with congestion of teeth on aligners dent on 3d- and dpm-technology. Herald of Science and Education. 2018; 2(37); 88-90. (In Russ.). Available from: http://scientificjournal.ru/images/PDF/2018/VNO-37/VNO-1-37--2.pdf
3. Elkholy F, Mikhaiel B, Schmidt F, Lapatki BG. Mechanical load exerted by PET-G aligners during mesial and distal derotation of a mandibular canine. Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics. 2017;78(5):361-370. doi: 10.1007/s00056-017-0090-4
4. Best AD, Shroff B, Carrico CK, Lindauer SJ. Treatment management between orthodontists and general practitioners performing clear aligner therapy. Angle Orthod. 2017;87(3):432-439. doi: 10.2319/062616-500.1
5. Cassetta M, Altieri F, Pandolfi S, Giansanti M. The combined use of computer-guided, minimally invasive, flapless corticotomy and clear aligners as a novel approach to moderate crowding: A case report. Korean J Orthod. 2017;47(2):130-141. doi: 10.4041/kjod.2017.47.2.130
6. Yang L, Li F, Cao M, Chen H, Wang X, Chen X, Yang L, Gao W, Petrone JF, Ding Y. Quantitative evaluation of maxillary interradicular bone with cone-beam computed tomography for bicortical placement of orthodontic mini-implants. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2015;147(6):725-737. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2015.02.018
7. Yitschaky O, Neuhof MS, Yitschaky M, Zini A. Relationship between dental crowding and mandibular incisor proclination during orthodontic treatment without extraction of permanent mandibular teeth. Angle Orthod. 2016;86(5):727-733. doi: 10.2319/080815-536.1
8. Zhang CY, DeBaz C, Bhandal G, Alli F, Buencamino Francisco MC, Thacker HL, Palomo JM, Palomo L. Buccal Bone Thickness in the Esthetic Zone of Postmenopausal Women: A CBCT Analysis. Implant Dent. 2016;25(4):478-484. doi: 10.1097/ID.0000000000000405
9. White DW, Julien KC, Jacob H, Campbell PM, Buschang PH. Discomfort associated with Invisalign and traditional brackets: A randomized, prospective trial. Angle Orthod. 2017;87(6):801-808. doi: 10.2319/091416-687.1
10. Sawchuk D, Currie K, Vich ML, Palomo JM, Flores-Mir C. Diagnostic methods for assessing maxillary skeletal and dental transverse deficiencies: A systematic review. Korean J Orthod. 2016;46(5):331-42. doi: 10.4041/kjod.2016.46.5.331
11. Ravera S, Castroflorio T, Garino F, Daher S, Cugliari G, Deregibus A. Maxillary molar distalization with aligners in adult patients: a multicenter retrospective study. Prog Orthod. 2016;17:12. doi: 10.1186/s40510-016-0126-0
12. Noll D, Mahon B, Shroff B, Carrico C, Lindauer SJ. Twitter analysis of the orthodontic patient experience with braces vs Invisalign. Angle Orthod. 2017;87(3):377-383. doi: 10.2319/062816-508.1
13. Montufar J, Romero M, Scougall-Vilchis RJ. Automatic 3-dimensional cephalometric landmarking based on active shape models in related projections. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2018;153(3):449-458. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2017.06.028
14. Montufar J, Romero M, Scougall-Vilchis RJ. Hybrid approach for automatic cephalometric landmark annotation on cone-beam computed tomography volumes. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2018;154(1):140-150. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2017.08.028
15. Hoang N, Nelson G, Hatcher D, Oberoi S. Evaluation of mandibular anterior alveolus in different skeletal patterns. Prog Orthod. 2016;17(1):22. doi: 10.1186/s40510-016-0135-z
16. Elshebiny T, Palomo JM, Baumgaertel S. Anatomic assessment of the mandibular buccal shelf for miniscrew insertion in white patients. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2018;153(4):505-511. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2017.08.014
Review
For citations:
Danilova M.A., Dmitrienko I.V., Arutyunyan L.I. 3D cephalometric assessment of bone tissue condition during the orthodontic treatment with clear aligners. Pediatric dentistry and dental prophylaxis. 2022;22(1):58-62. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.33925/1683-3031-2021-22-1-58-62
Views:
302
Email this article 
