Objectives: to compare the effect on sagittal and vertical dimension and mandibular position of two methods of distalizing upper molars (headgear and Cetlin appliance). Methods: 51 patients, 6 to 12 years old, were randomly selected. 30 were treated with the HG, 21 with the CA. Cephalometric tracings before and after treatment were analyzed. The amount of distal movement, tipping of the molars, inclination of the upper incisors and the skeletal effects on the maxilla and the mandible were measured. Casts were used to measure the amount of distalization. Results: mean treatment time was 22 months with the HG, 11 with the CA, when full class 1 molar relationship was acheived. Statistically significant differences were observed in the sagittal parameters, with the HG showing an orthopaedic effect on the maxilla (SNA -1,1°) and the CA producing a greater tipping of the molar (CA -7.6, HG -0.8, p<0.005). The CA produces a greater amount of distal movement (CA 3.7mm, HG 2.5mm, p<0.02). No significant differences were observed in the vertical parameters (SN/Md, Mx/Md, AFH/PFH) and in the mandibular position (SNB, SNPo). The overbite decreased slightly in the CA sample (p<0.01). Conclusions: both appliances are effective in the distal movement of the molars. Because of the distal tipping of the molars, retention would be mandatory during premolar eruption. Treatment time is shorter with the CA, possibly more comfortable for the patient, suggesting a greater effectiveness and efficiency. Even though it is often maintained that upper molar distalization would cause an opening of the bite as the mandible is hinged open, the results of the study do not seem to support this statement.

Back to the Scientific Program Program
Back to the Joint Meeting of the Continental European, Israeli, and Scandinavian (NOF) Divisions of the IADR (August 25 -- 28, 2004)

Top Level Search