Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

L G Gandini

Publications and source records attributed to L G Gandini.

2 recordsLinked to original sources

Effects of cervical headgear and edgewise appliances on growing patients.

Maxillary basal bone, dentoalveolar, and dental changes in Class II Division 1 patients treated to normal occlusion by using cervical headgear and edgewise appliances were retrospectively evaluated. A sample of 45 treated patients was compared with a group of 30 untreated patients. Subjects were drawn from the Department of Orthodontics, Araraquara School of Dentistry, Brazil, and ranged in age from 7.5 to 13.5 years. The groups were matched based on age, gender, and malocclusion. Roughly 87% of the treated group had a mesocephalic or brachicephalic pattern, and 13% had a dolicocephalic pattern. Cervical headgear was used until a Class I dental relationship was achieved. Our results demonstrated that the malocclusions were probably corrected by maintaining the maxillary first molars in position during maxillary growth. Maxillary basal bone changes (excluding dentoalveolar changes) did not differ significantly between the treated and the untreated groups. Molar extrusion after the use of cervical headgear was not supported by our data, and this must be considered in the treatment plan of patients who present similar facial types.

Adolescent↗

Maxillary and mandibular width changes studied using metallic implants.

The purpose of this implant study was to evaluate the transverse stability of the basal maxillary and mandibular structures. The sample included 25 subjects between 12 and 18 years of age who were followed for approximately 2.6 years. Metallic implants were placed bilaterally into the maxillary and mandibular corpora before treatment. Once implant stability had been confirmed, treatment (4 first premolar extractions followed by fixed appliance therapy) was initiated. Changes in the transverse maxillary and mandibular implants were evaluated cephalometrically and two groups (GROW+ and GROW++; selection based on growth changes in facial height and mandibular length) were compared. The GROW++ group showed significant width increases of the posterior maxillary implants (P <.001) and the mandibular implants (P =.009); there was no significant change for the anterior maxillary implants. The GROW+ group showed no significant width changes between the maxillary and mandibular implants. We conclude that (1) there are significant width increases during late adolescence of the basal mandibular and maxillary skeletal structures and (2) the width changes are related with growth potential.

Adolescent↗