The effectiveness of pendulum, K-loop, and distal jet distalization techniques in growing children and its effects on anchor unit: A comparative study

Background: A common strategy to correct Class II malocclusions using a nonextraction protocol in children is to move the maxillary molars distally using molar distalization appliances, which usually derive their anchorage from maxillary premolars, causing mesialization of premolars and protrusion of incisors. Objectives: To evaluate the skeletal, dental and soft tissue changes produced by three different distalizing appliances, namely, pendulum, K-loop, and distal jet appliances. Materials and Methods: Sixty-six children of mean age 14.13 years requiring molar distalization were divided into three groups: Group I (pendulum appliance), Group II (K-loop), and Group III (distal jet). Lateral cephalometric films were taken before and after 5 months of molar distalization and following cephalometric parameters were used to assess the effects of maxillary molar distalization, namely, anteroposterior skeletal (SNA/SNB/ANB), vertical skeletal (face height ratio/Frankfort-mandibular plane [FMA]/angle formed between Maxillary plane & Mandibular plane (MM)), interdental (overjet/overbite), maxillary dentoalveolar, and soft tissue parameters. Results: There was no significant age difference between the three groups. In overall treatment changes among the three groups, the Anteroposterior skeletal changes were not statistically significant, vertically FMA angle increased by 1.79° ± 2.25° and overbite reduced by 2.38 ± 1.83 mm. The maxillary first molars were distalized by an average of 4.70 ± 3.01 mm (Upper 6 [U6] to pterygoid vertical [PTV]). The maxillary central incisor labial tipping increased to an average of 1.61 ± 2.73 mm and cant of upper lip increased by 3.40° ± 5.88° are statistically significant (P < 0.05). Conclusion: All three distalization techniques in growing children produced significant effects on anchor unit. There was an increase in FMA angle, significant bite opening, proclination of the maxillary incisors and increase in the cant of the upper lip. Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:

Autor*in:	Pravinkumar S Marure [verfasserIn] Raju Umaji Patil [verfasserIn] Sumitra Reddy [verfasserIn] Amit Prakash [verfasserIn] Nillachandra Kshetrimayum [verfasserIn] Rajeevkumar Shukla [verfasserIn]

Format:	E-Artikel
Sprache:	Englisch

Erschienen:	2016

Schlagwörter:	Distal jet K-loop molar distalization pendulum

Übergeordnetes Werk:	In: Journal of Indian Society of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry - Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications, 2004, 34(2016), 4, Seite 331-340
Übergeordnetes Werk:	volume:34 ; year:2016 ; number:4 ; pages:331-340

Links:	Link aufrufen Link aufrufen Link aufrufen Journal toc Journal toc

DOI / URN:	10.4103/0970-4388.191411

Katalog-ID:	DOAJ030033225

Internformat


LEADER	01000caa a22002652 4500
001	DOAJ030033225
003	DE-627
005	20230503112401.0
007	cr uuu---uuuuu
008	230226s2016 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c
024	7		\|a 10.4103/0970-4388.191411 \|2 doi
035			\|a (DE-627)DOAJ030033225
035			\|a (DE-599)DOAJf880328e4617453ba6bad568de17712a
040			\|a DE-627 \|b ger \|c DE-627 \|e rakwb
041			\|a eng
050		0	\|a RK1-715
100	0		\|a Pravinkumar S Marure \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
245	1	4	\|a The effectiveness of pendulum, K-loop, and distal jet distalization techniques in growing children and its effects on anchor unit: A comparative study
264		1	\|c 2016
336			\|a Text \|b txt \|2 rdacontent
337			\|a Computermedien \|b c \|2 rdamedia
338			\|a Online-Ressource \|b cr \|2 rdacarrier
520			\|a Background: A common strategy to correct Class II malocclusions using a nonextraction protocol in children is to move the maxillary molars distally using molar distalization appliances, which usually derive their anchorage from maxillary premolars, causing mesialization of premolars and protrusion of incisors. Objectives: To evaluate the skeletal, dental and soft tissue changes produced by three different distalizing appliances, namely, pendulum, K-loop, and distal jet appliances. Materials and Methods: Sixty-six children of mean age 14.13 years requiring molar distalization were divided into three groups: Group I (pendulum appliance), Group II (K-loop), and Group III (distal jet). Lateral cephalometric films were taken before and after 5 months of molar distalization and following cephalometric parameters were used to assess the effects of maxillary molar distalization, namely, anteroposterior skeletal (SNA/SNB/ANB), vertical skeletal (face height ratio/Frankfort-mandibular plane [FMA]/angle formed between Maxillary plane & Mandibular plane (MM)), interdental (overjet/overbite), maxillary dentoalveolar, and soft tissue parameters. Results: There was no significant age difference between the three groups. In overall treatment changes among the three groups, the Anteroposterior skeletal changes were not statistically significant, vertically FMA angle increased by 1.79° ± 2.25° and overbite reduced by 2.38 ± 1.83 mm. The maxillary first molars were distalized by an average of 4.70 ± 3.01 mm (Upper 6 [U6] to pterygoid vertical [PTV]). The maxillary central incisor labial tipping increased to an average of 1.61 ± 2.73 mm and cant of upper lip increased by 3.40° ± 5.88° are statistically significant (P < 0.05). Conclusion: All three distalization techniques in growing children produced significant effects on anchor unit. There was an increase in FMA angle, significant bite opening, proclination of the maxillary incisors and increase in the cant of the upper lip.
650		4	\|a Distal jet
650		4	\|a K-loop
650		4	\|a molar distalization
650		4	\|a pendulum
653		0	\|a Dentistry
700	0		\|a Raju Umaji Patil \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Sumitra Reddy \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Amit Prakash \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Nillachandra Kshetrimayum \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Rajeevkumar Shukla \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
773	0	8	\|i In \|t Journal of Indian Society of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry \|d Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications, 2004 \|g 34(2016), 4, Seite 331-340 \|w (DE-627)461909146 \|w (DE-600)2164554-1 \|x 19983905 \|7 nnns
773	1	8	\|g volume:34 \|g year:2016 \|g number:4 \|g pages:331-340
856	4	0	\|u https://doi.org/10.4103/0970-4388.191411 \|z kostenfrei
856	4	0	\|u https://doaj.org/article/f880328e4617453ba6bad568de17712a \|z kostenfrei
856	4	0	\|u http://www.jisppd.com/article.asp?issn=0970-4388;year=2016;volume=34;issue=4;spage=331;epage=340;aulast=Marure \|z kostenfrei
856	4	2	\|u https://doaj.org/toc/0970-4388 \|y Journal toc \|z kostenfrei
856	4	2	\|u https://doaj.org/toc/1998-3905 \|y Journal toc \|z kostenfrei
912			\|a GBV_USEFLAG_A
912			\|a SYSFLAG_A
912			\|a GBV_DOAJ
912			\|a SSG-OLC-PHA
912			\|a GBV_ILN_11
912			\|a GBV_ILN_20
912			\|a GBV_ILN_22
912			\|a GBV_ILN_23
912			\|a GBV_ILN_24
912			\|a GBV_ILN_39
912			\|a GBV_ILN_40
912			\|a GBV_ILN_60
912			\|a GBV_ILN_62
912			\|a GBV_ILN_63
912			\|a GBV_ILN_65
912			\|a GBV_ILN_69
912			\|a GBV_ILN_73
912			\|a GBV_ILN_74
912			\|a GBV_ILN_95
912			\|a GBV_ILN_105
912			\|a GBV_ILN_110
912			\|a GBV_ILN_151
912			\|a GBV_ILN_161
912			\|a GBV_ILN_170
912			\|a GBV_ILN_206
912			\|a GBV_ILN_213
912			\|a GBV_ILN_230
912			\|a GBV_ILN_285
912			\|a GBV_ILN_293
912			\|a GBV_ILN_602
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2003
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2014
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4012
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4037
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4112
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4125
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4126
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4249
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4305
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4306
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4307
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4313
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4322
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4323
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4324
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4325
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4338
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4367
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4700
951			\|a AR
952			\|d 34 \|j 2016 \|e 4 \|h 331-340

Indexfelder

author_variant	p s m psm r u p rup s r sr a p ap n k nk r s rs
matchkey_str	article:19983905:2016----::hefcieesfedlmloaditledsaiainehiusnrwncideadtef
hierarchy_sort_str	2016
callnumber-subject-code	RK
publishDate	2016
allfields	10.4103/0970-4388.191411 doi (DE-627)DOAJ030033225 (DE-599)DOAJf880328e4617453ba6bad568de17712a DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng RK1-715 Pravinkumar S Marure verfasserin aut The effectiveness of pendulum, K-loop, and distal jet distalization techniques in growing children and its effects on anchor unit: A comparative study 2016 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Background: A common strategy to correct Class II malocclusions using a nonextraction protocol in children is to move the maxillary molars distally using molar distalization appliances, which usually derive their anchorage from maxillary premolars, causing mesialization of premolars and protrusion of incisors. Objectives: To evaluate the skeletal, dental and soft tissue changes produced by three different distalizing appliances, namely, pendulum, K-loop, and distal jet appliances. Materials and Methods: Sixty-six children of mean age 14.13 years requiring molar distalization were divided into three groups: Group I (pendulum appliance), Group II (K-loop), and Group III (distal jet). Lateral cephalometric films were taken before and after 5 months of molar distalization and following cephalometric parameters were used to assess the effects of maxillary molar distalization, namely, anteroposterior skeletal (SNA/SNB/ANB), vertical skeletal (face height ratio/Frankfort-mandibular plane [FMA]/angle formed between Maxillary plane & Mandibular plane (MM)), interdental (overjet/overbite), maxillary dentoalveolar, and soft tissue parameters. Results: There was no significant age difference between the three groups. In overall treatment changes among the three groups, the Anteroposterior skeletal changes were not statistically significant, vertically FMA angle increased by 1.79° ± 2.25° and overbite reduced by 2.38 ± 1.83 mm. The maxillary first molars were distalized by an average of 4.70 ± 3.01 mm (Upper 6 [U6] to pterygoid vertical [PTV]). The maxillary central incisor labial tipping increased to an average of 1.61 ± 2.73 mm and cant of upper lip increased by 3.40° ± 5.88° are statistically significant (P < 0.05). Conclusion: All three distalization techniques in growing children produced significant effects on anchor unit. There was an increase in FMA angle, significant bite opening, proclination of the maxillary incisors and increase in the cant of the upper lip. Distal jet K-loop molar distalization pendulum Dentistry Raju Umaji Patil verfasserin aut Sumitra Reddy verfasserin aut Amit Prakash verfasserin aut Nillachandra Kshetrimayum verfasserin aut Rajeevkumar Shukla verfasserin aut In Journal of Indian Society of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications, 2004 34(2016), 4, Seite 331-340 (DE-627)461909146 (DE-600)2164554-1 19983905 nnns volume:34 year:2016 number:4 pages:331-340 https://doi.org/10.4103/0970-4388.191411 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/f880328e4617453ba6bad568de17712a kostenfrei http://www.jisppd.com/article.asp?issn=0970-4388;year=2016;volume=34;issue=4;spage=331;epage=340;aulast=Marure kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/0970-4388 Journal toc kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1998-3905 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 34 2016 4 331-340
spelling	10.4103/0970-4388.191411 doi (DE-627)DOAJ030033225 (DE-599)DOAJf880328e4617453ba6bad568de17712a DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng RK1-715 Pravinkumar S Marure verfasserin aut The effectiveness of pendulum, K-loop, and distal jet distalization techniques in growing children and its effects on anchor unit: A comparative study 2016 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Background: A common strategy to correct Class II malocclusions using a nonextraction protocol in children is to move the maxillary molars distally using molar distalization appliances, which usually derive their anchorage from maxillary premolars, causing mesialization of premolars and protrusion of incisors. Objectives: To evaluate the skeletal, dental and soft tissue changes produced by three different distalizing appliances, namely, pendulum, K-loop, and distal jet appliances. Materials and Methods: Sixty-six children of mean age 14.13 years requiring molar distalization were divided into three groups: Group I (pendulum appliance), Group II (K-loop), and Group III (distal jet). Lateral cephalometric films were taken before and after 5 months of molar distalization and following cephalometric parameters were used to assess the effects of maxillary molar distalization, namely, anteroposterior skeletal (SNA/SNB/ANB), vertical skeletal (face height ratio/Frankfort-mandibular plane [FMA]/angle formed between Maxillary plane & Mandibular plane (MM)), interdental (overjet/overbite), maxillary dentoalveolar, and soft tissue parameters. Results: There was no significant age difference between the three groups. In overall treatment changes among the three groups, the Anteroposterior skeletal changes were not statistically significant, vertically FMA angle increased by 1.79° ± 2.25° and overbite reduced by 2.38 ± 1.83 mm. The maxillary first molars were distalized by an average of 4.70 ± 3.01 mm (Upper 6 [U6] to pterygoid vertical [PTV]). The maxillary central incisor labial tipping increased to an average of 1.61 ± 2.73 mm and cant of upper lip increased by 3.40° ± 5.88° are statistically significant (P < 0.05). Conclusion: All three distalization techniques in growing children produced significant effects on anchor unit. There was an increase in FMA angle, significant bite opening, proclination of the maxillary incisors and increase in the cant of the upper lip. Distal jet K-loop molar distalization pendulum Dentistry Raju Umaji Patil verfasserin aut Sumitra Reddy verfasserin aut Amit Prakash verfasserin aut Nillachandra Kshetrimayum verfasserin aut Rajeevkumar Shukla verfasserin aut In Journal of Indian Society of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications, 2004 34(2016), 4, Seite 331-340 (DE-627)461909146 (DE-600)2164554-1 19983905 nnns volume:34 year:2016 number:4 pages:331-340 https://doi.org/10.4103/0970-4388.191411 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/f880328e4617453ba6bad568de17712a kostenfrei http://www.jisppd.com/article.asp?issn=0970-4388;year=2016;volume=34;issue=4;spage=331;epage=340;aulast=Marure kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/0970-4388 Journal toc kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1998-3905 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 34 2016 4 331-340
allfields_unstemmed	10.4103/0970-4388.191411 doi (DE-627)DOAJ030033225 (DE-599)DOAJf880328e4617453ba6bad568de17712a DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng RK1-715 Pravinkumar S Marure verfasserin aut The effectiveness of pendulum, K-loop, and distal jet distalization techniques in growing children and its effects on anchor unit: A comparative study 2016 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Background: A common strategy to correct Class II malocclusions using a nonextraction protocol in children is to move the maxillary molars distally using molar distalization appliances, which usually derive their anchorage from maxillary premolars, causing mesialization of premolars and protrusion of incisors. Objectives: To evaluate the skeletal, dental and soft tissue changes produced by three different distalizing appliances, namely, pendulum, K-loop, and distal jet appliances. Materials and Methods: Sixty-six children of mean age 14.13 years requiring molar distalization were divided into three groups: Group I (pendulum appliance), Group II (K-loop), and Group III (distal jet). Lateral cephalometric films were taken before and after 5 months of molar distalization and following cephalometric parameters were used to assess the effects of maxillary molar distalization, namely, anteroposterior skeletal (SNA/SNB/ANB), vertical skeletal (face height ratio/Frankfort-mandibular plane [FMA]/angle formed between Maxillary plane & Mandibular plane (MM)), interdental (overjet/overbite), maxillary dentoalveolar, and soft tissue parameters. Results: There was no significant age difference between the three groups. In overall treatment changes among the three groups, the Anteroposterior skeletal changes were not statistically significant, vertically FMA angle increased by 1.79° ± 2.25° and overbite reduced by 2.38 ± 1.83 mm. The maxillary first molars were distalized by an average of 4.70 ± 3.01 mm (Upper 6 [U6] to pterygoid vertical [PTV]). The maxillary central incisor labial tipping increased to an average of 1.61 ± 2.73 mm and cant of upper lip increased by 3.40° ± 5.88° are statistically significant (P < 0.05). Conclusion: All three distalization techniques in growing children produced significant effects on anchor unit. There was an increase in FMA angle, significant bite opening, proclination of the maxillary incisors and increase in the cant of the upper lip. Distal jet K-loop molar distalization pendulum Dentistry Raju Umaji Patil verfasserin aut Sumitra Reddy verfasserin aut Amit Prakash verfasserin aut Nillachandra Kshetrimayum verfasserin aut Rajeevkumar Shukla verfasserin aut In Journal of Indian Society of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications, 2004 34(2016), 4, Seite 331-340 (DE-627)461909146 (DE-600)2164554-1 19983905 nnns volume:34 year:2016 number:4 pages:331-340 https://doi.org/10.4103/0970-4388.191411 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/f880328e4617453ba6bad568de17712a kostenfrei http://www.jisppd.com/article.asp?issn=0970-4388;year=2016;volume=34;issue=4;spage=331;epage=340;aulast=Marure kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/0970-4388 Journal toc kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1998-3905 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 34 2016 4 331-340
allfieldsGer	10.4103/0970-4388.191411 doi (DE-627)DOAJ030033225 (DE-599)DOAJf880328e4617453ba6bad568de17712a DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng RK1-715 Pravinkumar S Marure verfasserin aut The effectiveness of pendulum, K-loop, and distal jet distalization techniques in growing children and its effects on anchor unit: A comparative study 2016 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Background: A common strategy to correct Class II malocclusions using a nonextraction protocol in children is to move the maxillary molars distally using molar distalization appliances, which usually derive their anchorage from maxillary premolars, causing mesialization of premolars and protrusion of incisors. Objectives: To evaluate the skeletal, dental and soft tissue changes produced by three different distalizing appliances, namely, pendulum, K-loop, and distal jet appliances. Materials and Methods: Sixty-six children of mean age 14.13 years requiring molar distalization were divided into three groups: Group I (pendulum appliance), Group II (K-loop), and Group III (distal jet). Lateral cephalometric films were taken before and after 5 months of molar distalization and following cephalometric parameters were used to assess the effects of maxillary molar distalization, namely, anteroposterior skeletal (SNA/SNB/ANB), vertical skeletal (face height ratio/Frankfort-mandibular plane [FMA]/angle formed between Maxillary plane & Mandibular plane (MM)), interdental (overjet/overbite), maxillary dentoalveolar, and soft tissue parameters. Results: There was no significant age difference between the three groups. In overall treatment changes among the three groups, the Anteroposterior skeletal changes were not statistically significant, vertically FMA angle increased by 1.79° ± 2.25° and overbite reduced by 2.38 ± 1.83 mm. The maxillary first molars were distalized by an average of 4.70 ± 3.01 mm (Upper 6 [U6] to pterygoid vertical [PTV]). The maxillary central incisor labial tipping increased to an average of 1.61 ± 2.73 mm and cant of upper lip increased by 3.40° ± 5.88° are statistically significant (P < 0.05). Conclusion: All three distalization techniques in growing children produced significant effects on anchor unit. There was an increase in FMA angle, significant bite opening, proclination of the maxillary incisors and increase in the cant of the upper lip. Distal jet K-loop molar distalization pendulum Dentistry Raju Umaji Patil verfasserin aut Sumitra Reddy verfasserin aut Amit Prakash verfasserin aut Nillachandra Kshetrimayum verfasserin aut Rajeevkumar Shukla verfasserin aut In Journal of Indian Society of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications, 2004 34(2016), 4, Seite 331-340 (DE-627)461909146 (DE-600)2164554-1 19983905 nnns volume:34 year:2016 number:4 pages:331-340 https://doi.org/10.4103/0970-4388.191411 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/f880328e4617453ba6bad568de17712a kostenfrei http://www.jisppd.com/article.asp?issn=0970-4388;year=2016;volume=34;issue=4;spage=331;epage=340;aulast=Marure kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/0970-4388 Journal toc kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1998-3905 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 34 2016 4 331-340
allfieldsSound	10.4103/0970-4388.191411 doi (DE-627)DOAJ030033225 (DE-599)DOAJf880328e4617453ba6bad568de17712a DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng RK1-715 Pravinkumar S Marure verfasserin aut The effectiveness of pendulum, K-loop, and distal jet distalization techniques in growing children and its effects on anchor unit: A comparative study 2016 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Background: A common strategy to correct Class II malocclusions using a nonextraction protocol in children is to move the maxillary molars distally using molar distalization appliances, which usually derive their anchorage from maxillary premolars, causing mesialization of premolars and protrusion of incisors. Objectives: To evaluate the skeletal, dental and soft tissue changes produced by three different distalizing appliances, namely, pendulum, K-loop, and distal jet appliances. Materials and Methods: Sixty-six children of mean age 14.13 years requiring molar distalization were divided into three groups: Group I (pendulum appliance), Group II (K-loop), and Group III (distal jet). Lateral cephalometric films were taken before and after 5 months of molar distalization and following cephalometric parameters were used to assess the effects of maxillary molar distalization, namely, anteroposterior skeletal (SNA/SNB/ANB), vertical skeletal (face height ratio/Frankfort-mandibular plane [FMA]/angle formed between Maxillary plane & Mandibular plane (MM)), interdental (overjet/overbite), maxillary dentoalveolar, and soft tissue parameters. Results: There was no significant age difference between the three groups. In overall treatment changes among the three groups, the Anteroposterior skeletal changes were not statistically significant, vertically FMA angle increased by 1.79° ± 2.25° and overbite reduced by 2.38 ± 1.83 mm. The maxillary first molars were distalized by an average of 4.70 ± 3.01 mm (Upper 6 [U6] to pterygoid vertical [PTV]). The maxillary central incisor labial tipping increased to an average of 1.61 ± 2.73 mm and cant of upper lip increased by 3.40° ± 5.88° are statistically significant (P < 0.05). Conclusion: All three distalization techniques in growing children produced significant effects on anchor unit. There was an increase in FMA angle, significant bite opening, proclination of the maxillary incisors and increase in the cant of the upper lip. Distal jet K-loop molar distalization pendulum Dentistry Raju Umaji Patil verfasserin aut Sumitra Reddy verfasserin aut Amit Prakash verfasserin aut Nillachandra Kshetrimayum verfasserin aut Rajeevkumar Shukla verfasserin aut In Journal of Indian Society of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications, 2004 34(2016), 4, Seite 331-340 (DE-627)461909146 (DE-600)2164554-1 19983905 nnns volume:34 year:2016 number:4 pages:331-340 https://doi.org/10.4103/0970-4388.191411 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/f880328e4617453ba6bad568de17712a kostenfrei http://www.jisppd.com/article.asp?issn=0970-4388;year=2016;volume=34;issue=4;spage=331;epage=340;aulast=Marure kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/0970-4388 Journal toc kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1998-3905 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 34 2016 4 331-340
language	English
source	In Journal of Indian Society of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry 34(2016), 4, Seite 331-340 volume:34 year:2016 number:4 pages:331-340
sourceStr	In Journal of Indian Society of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry 34(2016), 4, Seite 331-340 volume:34 year:2016 number:4 pages:331-340
format_phy_str_mv	Article
institution	findex.gbv.de
topic_facet	Distal jet K-loop molar distalization pendulum Dentistry
isfreeaccess_bool	true
container_title	Journal of Indian Society of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry
authorswithroles_txt_mv	Pravinkumar S Marure @@aut@@ Raju Umaji Patil @@aut@@ Sumitra Reddy @@aut@@ Amit Prakash @@aut@@ Nillachandra Kshetrimayum @@aut@@ Rajeevkumar Shukla @@aut@@
publishDateDaySort_date	2016-01-01T00:00:00Z
hierarchy_top_id	461909146
id	DOAJ030033225
language_de	englisch
fullrecord	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ030033225</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230503112401.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230226s2016 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.4103/0970-4388.191411</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ030033225</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJf880328e4617453ba6bad568de17712a</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">RK1-715</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Pravinkumar S Marure</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">The effectiveness of pendulum, K-loop, and distal jet distalization techniques in growing children and its effects on anchor unit: A comparative study</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2016</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Background: A common strategy to correct Class II malocclusions using a nonextraction protocol in children is to move the maxillary molars distally using molar distalization appliances, which usually derive their anchorage from maxillary premolars, causing mesialization of premolars and protrusion of incisors. Objectives: To evaluate the skeletal, dental and soft tissue changes produced by three different distalizing appliances, namely, pendulum, K-loop, and distal jet appliances. Materials and Methods: Sixty-six children of mean age 14.13 years requiring molar distalization were divided into three groups: Group I (pendulum appliance), Group II (K-loop), and Group III (distal jet). Lateral cephalometric films were taken before and after 5 months of molar distalization and following cephalometric parameters were used to assess the effects of maxillary molar distalization, namely, anteroposterior skeletal (SNA/SNB/ANB), vertical skeletal (face height ratio/Frankfort-mandibular plane [FMA]/angle formed between Maxillary plane & Mandibular plane (MM)), interdental (overjet/overbite), maxillary dentoalveolar, and soft tissue parameters. Results: There was no significant age difference between the three groups. In overall treatment changes among the three groups, the Anteroposterior skeletal changes were not statistically significant, vertically FMA angle increased by 1.79° ± 2.25° and overbite reduced by 2.38 ± 1.83 mm. The maxillary first molars were distalized by an average of 4.70 ± 3.01 mm (Upper 6 [U6] to pterygoid vertical [PTV]). The maxillary central incisor labial tipping increased to an average of 1.61 ± 2.73 mm and cant of upper lip increased by 3.40° ± 5.88° are statistically significant (P < 0.05). Conclusion: All three distalization techniques in growing children produced significant effects on anchor unit. There was an increase in FMA angle, significant bite opening, proclination of the maxillary incisors and increase in the cant of the upper lip.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Distal jet</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">K-loop</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">molar distalization</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">pendulum</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Dentistry</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Raju Umaji Patil</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Sumitra Reddy</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Amit Prakash</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Nillachandra Kshetrimayum</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Rajeevkumar Shukla</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">Journal of Indian Society of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry</subfield><subfield code="d">Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications, 2004</subfield><subfield code="g">34(2016), 4, Seite 331-340</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)461909146</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2164554-1</subfield><subfield code="x">19983905</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:34</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2016</subfield><subfield code="g">number:4</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:331-340</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.4103/0970-4388.191411</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/f880328e4617453ba6bad568de17712a</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">http://www.jisppd.com/article.asp?issn=0970-4388;year=2016;volume=34;issue=4;spage=331;epage=340;aulast=Marure</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/0970-4388</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/1998-3905</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">34</subfield><subfield code="j">2016</subfield><subfield code="e">4</subfield><subfield code="h">331-340</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
callnumber-first	R - Medicine
author	Pravinkumar S Marure
spellingShingle	Pravinkumar S Marure misc RK1-715 misc Distal jet misc K-loop misc molar distalization misc pendulum misc Dentistry The effectiveness of pendulum, K-loop, and distal jet distalization techniques in growing children and its effects on anchor unit: A comparative study
authorStr	Pravinkumar S Marure
ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv	@@773@@(DE-627)461909146
format	electronic Article
delete_txt_mv	keep
author_role	aut aut aut aut aut aut
collection	DOAJ
remote_str	true
callnumber-label	RK1-715
illustrated	Not Illustrated
issn	19983905
topic_title	RK1-715 The effectiveness of pendulum, K-loop, and distal jet distalization techniques in growing children and its effects on anchor unit: A comparative study Distal jet K-loop molar distalization pendulum
topic	misc RK1-715 misc Distal jet misc K-loop misc molar distalization misc pendulum misc Dentistry
topic_unstemmed	misc RK1-715 misc Distal jet misc K-loop misc molar distalization misc pendulum misc Dentistry
topic_browse	misc RK1-715 misc Distal jet misc K-loop misc molar distalization misc pendulum misc Dentistry
format_facet	Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource
format_main_str_mv	Text Zeitschrift/Artikel
carriertype_str_mv	cr
hierarchy_parent_title	Journal of Indian Society of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry
hierarchy_parent_id	461909146
hierarchy_top_title	Journal of Indian Society of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry
isfreeaccess_txt	true
familylinks_str_mv	(DE-627)461909146 (DE-600)2164554-1
title	The effectiveness of pendulum, K-loop, and distal jet distalization techniques in growing children and its effects on anchor unit: A comparative study
ctrlnum	(DE-627)DOAJ030033225 (DE-599)DOAJf880328e4617453ba6bad568de17712a
title_full	The effectiveness of pendulum, K-loop, and distal jet distalization techniques in growing children and its effects on anchor unit: A comparative study
author_sort	Pravinkumar S Marure
journal	Journal of Indian Society of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry
journalStr	Journal of Indian Society of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry
callnumber-first-code	R
lang_code	eng
isOA_bool	true
recordtype	marc
publishDateSort	2016
contenttype_str_mv	txt
container_start_page	331
author_browse	Pravinkumar S Marure Raju Umaji Patil Sumitra Reddy Amit Prakash Nillachandra Kshetrimayum Rajeevkumar Shukla
container_volume	34
class	RK1-715
format_se	Elektronische Aufsätze
author-letter	Pravinkumar S Marure
doi_str_mv	10.4103/0970-4388.191411
author2-role	verfasserin
title_sort	effectiveness of pendulum, k-loop, and distal jet distalization techniques in growing children and its effects on anchor unit: a comparative study
callnumber	RK1-715
title_auth	The effectiveness of pendulum, K-loop, and distal jet distalization techniques in growing children and its effects on anchor unit: A comparative study
abstract	Background: A common strategy to correct Class II malocclusions using a nonextraction protocol in children is to move the maxillary molars distally using molar distalization appliances, which usually derive their anchorage from maxillary premolars, causing mesialization of premolars and protrusion of incisors. Objectives: To evaluate the skeletal, dental and soft tissue changes produced by three different distalizing appliances, namely, pendulum, K-loop, and distal jet appliances. Materials and Methods: Sixty-six children of mean age 14.13 years requiring molar distalization were divided into three groups: Group I (pendulum appliance), Group II (K-loop), and Group III (distal jet). Lateral cephalometric films were taken before and after 5 months of molar distalization and following cephalometric parameters were used to assess the effects of maxillary molar distalization, namely, anteroposterior skeletal (SNA/SNB/ANB), vertical skeletal (face height ratio/Frankfort-mandibular plane [FMA]/angle formed between Maxillary plane & Mandibular plane (MM)), interdental (overjet/overbite), maxillary dentoalveolar, and soft tissue parameters. Results: There was no significant age difference between the three groups. In overall treatment changes among the three groups, the Anteroposterior skeletal changes were not statistically significant, vertically FMA angle increased by 1.79° ± 2.25° and overbite reduced by 2.38 ± 1.83 mm. The maxillary first molars were distalized by an average of 4.70 ± 3.01 mm (Upper 6 [U6] to pterygoid vertical [PTV]). The maxillary central incisor labial tipping increased to an average of 1.61 ± 2.73 mm and cant of upper lip increased by 3.40° ± 5.88° are statistically significant (P < 0.05). Conclusion: All three distalization techniques in growing children produced significant effects on anchor unit. There was an increase in FMA angle, significant bite opening, proclination of the maxillary incisors and increase in the cant of the upper lip.
abstractGer	Background: A common strategy to correct Class II malocclusions using a nonextraction protocol in children is to move the maxillary molars distally using molar distalization appliances, which usually derive their anchorage from maxillary premolars, causing mesialization of premolars and protrusion of incisors. Objectives: To evaluate the skeletal, dental and soft tissue changes produced by three different distalizing appliances, namely, pendulum, K-loop, and distal jet appliances. Materials and Methods: Sixty-six children of mean age 14.13 years requiring molar distalization were divided into three groups: Group I (pendulum appliance), Group II (K-loop), and Group III (distal jet). Lateral cephalometric films were taken before and after 5 months of molar distalization and following cephalometric parameters were used to assess the effects of maxillary molar distalization, namely, anteroposterior skeletal (SNA/SNB/ANB), vertical skeletal (face height ratio/Frankfort-mandibular plane [FMA]/angle formed between Maxillary plane & Mandibular plane (MM)), interdental (overjet/overbite), maxillary dentoalveolar, and soft tissue parameters. Results: There was no significant age difference between the three groups. In overall treatment changes among the three groups, the Anteroposterior skeletal changes were not statistically significant, vertically FMA angle increased by 1.79° ± 2.25° and overbite reduced by 2.38 ± 1.83 mm. The maxillary first molars were distalized by an average of 4.70 ± 3.01 mm (Upper 6 [U6] to pterygoid vertical [PTV]). The maxillary central incisor labial tipping increased to an average of 1.61 ± 2.73 mm and cant of upper lip increased by 3.40° ± 5.88° are statistically significant (P < 0.05). Conclusion: All three distalization techniques in growing children produced significant effects on anchor unit. There was an increase in FMA angle, significant bite opening, proclination of the maxillary incisors and increase in the cant of the upper lip.
abstract_unstemmed	Background: A common strategy to correct Class II malocclusions using a nonextraction protocol in children is to move the maxillary molars distally using molar distalization appliances, which usually derive their anchorage from maxillary premolars, causing mesialization of premolars and protrusion of incisors. Objectives: To evaluate the skeletal, dental and soft tissue changes produced by three different distalizing appliances, namely, pendulum, K-loop, and distal jet appliances. Materials and Methods: Sixty-six children of mean age 14.13 years requiring molar distalization were divided into three groups: Group I (pendulum appliance), Group II (K-loop), and Group III (distal jet). Lateral cephalometric films were taken before and after 5 months of molar distalization and following cephalometric parameters were used to assess the effects of maxillary molar distalization, namely, anteroposterior skeletal (SNA/SNB/ANB), vertical skeletal (face height ratio/Frankfort-mandibular plane [FMA]/angle formed between Maxillary plane & Mandibular plane (MM)), interdental (overjet/overbite), maxillary dentoalveolar, and soft tissue parameters. Results: There was no significant age difference between the three groups. In overall treatment changes among the three groups, the Anteroposterior skeletal changes were not statistically significant, vertically FMA angle increased by 1.79° ± 2.25° and overbite reduced by 2.38 ± 1.83 mm. The maxillary first molars were distalized by an average of 4.70 ± 3.01 mm (Upper 6 [U6] to pterygoid vertical [PTV]). The maxillary central incisor labial tipping increased to an average of 1.61 ± 2.73 mm and cant of upper lip increased by 3.40° ± 5.88° are statistically significant (P < 0.05). Conclusion: All three distalization techniques in growing children produced significant effects on anchor unit. There was an increase in FMA angle, significant bite opening, proclination of the maxillary incisors and increase in the cant of the upper lip.
collection_details	GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ SSG-OLC-PHA GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700
container_issue	4
title_short	The effectiveness of pendulum, K-loop, and distal jet distalization techniques in growing children and its effects on anchor unit: A comparative study
url	https://doi.org/10.4103/0970-4388.191411 https://doaj.org/article/f880328e4617453ba6bad568de17712a http://www.jisppd.com/article.asp?issn=0970-4388;year=2016;volume=34;issue=4;spage=331;epage=340;aulast=Marure https://doaj.org/toc/0970-4388 https://doaj.org/toc/1998-3905
remote_bool	true
author2	Raju Umaji Patil Sumitra Reddy Amit Prakash Nillachandra Kshetrimayum Rajeevkumar Shukla
author2Str	Raju Umaji Patil Sumitra Reddy Amit Prakash Nillachandra Kshetrimayum Rajeevkumar Shukla
ppnlink	461909146
callnumber-subject	RK - Dentistry
mediatype_str_mv	c
isOA_txt	true
hochschulschrift_bool	false
doi_str	10.4103/0970-4388.191411
callnumber-a	RK1-715
up_date	2024-07-04T01:20:06.836Z
_version_	1803609447426162688
fullrecord_marcxml	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ030033225</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230503112401.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230226s2016 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.4103/0970-4388.191411</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ030033225</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJf880328e4617453ba6bad568de17712a</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">RK1-715</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Pravinkumar S Marure</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">The effectiveness of pendulum, K-loop, and distal jet distalization techniques in growing children and its effects on anchor unit: A comparative study</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2016</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Background: A common strategy to correct Class II malocclusions using a nonextraction protocol in children is to move the maxillary molars distally using molar distalization appliances, which usually derive their anchorage from maxillary premolars, causing mesialization of premolars and protrusion of incisors. Objectives: To evaluate the skeletal, dental and soft tissue changes produced by three different distalizing appliances, namely, pendulum, K-loop, and distal jet appliances. Materials and Methods: Sixty-six children of mean age 14.13 years requiring molar distalization were divided into three groups: Group I (pendulum appliance), Group II (K-loop), and Group III (distal jet). Lateral cephalometric films were taken before and after 5 months of molar distalization and following cephalometric parameters were used to assess the effects of maxillary molar distalization, namely, anteroposterior skeletal (SNA/SNB/ANB), vertical skeletal (face height ratio/Frankfort-mandibular plane [FMA]/angle formed between Maxillary plane & Mandibular plane (MM)), interdental (overjet/overbite), maxillary dentoalveolar, and soft tissue parameters. Results: There was no significant age difference between the three groups. In overall treatment changes among the three groups, the Anteroposterior skeletal changes were not statistically significant, vertically FMA angle increased by 1.79° ± 2.25° and overbite reduced by 2.38 ± 1.83 mm. The maxillary first molars were distalized by an average of 4.70 ± 3.01 mm (Upper 6 [U6] to pterygoid vertical [PTV]). The maxillary central incisor labial tipping increased to an average of 1.61 ± 2.73 mm and cant of upper lip increased by 3.40° ± 5.88° are statistically significant (P < 0.05). Conclusion: All three distalization techniques in growing children produced significant effects on anchor unit. There was an increase in FMA angle, significant bite opening, proclination of the maxillary incisors and increase in the cant of the upper lip.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Distal jet</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">K-loop</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">molar distalization</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">pendulum</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Dentistry</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Raju Umaji Patil</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Sumitra Reddy</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Amit Prakash</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Nillachandra Kshetrimayum</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Rajeevkumar Shukla</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">Journal of Indian Society of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry</subfield><subfield code="d">Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications, 2004</subfield><subfield code="g">34(2016), 4, Seite 331-340</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)461909146</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2164554-1</subfield><subfield code="x">19983905</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:34</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2016</subfield><subfield code="g">number:4</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:331-340</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.4103/0970-4388.191411</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/f880328e4617453ba6bad568de17712a</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">http://www.jisppd.com/article.asp?issn=0970-4388;year=2016;volume=34;issue=4;spage=331;epage=340;aulast=Marure</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/0970-4388</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/1998-3905</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">34</subfield><subfield code="j">2016</subfield><subfield code="e">4</subfield><subfield code="h">331-340</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
score	7.400511

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Schreiben Sie uns!

The effectiveness of pendulum, K-loop, and distal jet distalization techniques in growing children and its effects on anchor unit: A comparative study

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Zugang & Verfügbarkeit

Vorhandene Bände

Nicht das Richtige dabei?