PubMed · 3063595
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
E Rossopoulos, N Kafandaris. Problems with the double arch impression technique.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/3063595/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
OBJECTIVE: To investigate empirically the imaging characteristics of the Orthopantomograph OP 100 and compare them to the average form of the dental arch. METHODS: Repeatable radiographs were taken of a lead resolution grid positioned at 1 mm increments along known angular intervals of the projected X-ray beam. Focal trough thickness was determined by visibility of the 1.5 lp mm-1 resolution limits. The path of the effective rotation center was determined using a film positioned at right angles to the slit beam. The vertical magnification and horizontal magnification and distortion index, corrected for the position of the tomographic layer, were calculated using a reference object placed at various resolution limits of the focal trough. The beam projection angle was calculated with respect to the central plane of the focal trough and the average dental arch shape compared with the average proximal contact angle. RESULTS: The maximum resolution observed at the central plane of the focal trough was 5 lp mm-1. The width of the focal trough varied from 17 mm in the anterior region to 44 mm in the posterior region. The path of the effective rotation center was found to translate between three fixed centers of rotation, with the effective anterior projection radius of 24 mm. The vertical magnification factor within the focal trough showed a linear increase along the beam path from 1.24-1.37 and the horizontal magnification varied from 1.01-1.63. The distortion index varied from 0.84-1.24. The beam projection angle increased from 90 degrees anteriorly to 115 degrees in the premolar area with respect to the central plane of the focal trough and from 90 degrees anteriorly to 110 degrees in the premolar area compared with the average dental arch. CONCLUSIONS: The OP 100 provides a focal trough conforming well to the overall geometry of the dental arch and provides adequate spatial resolution.
The human dental arch form is shown to be accurately represented mathematically by the beta function. The average correlation coefficient between measured arch-shape data and the mathematical arch shape, expressed by the beta function, is 0.98 with a standard deviation of 0.02. Forty sets of casts--15 Class I, 16 Class II, and 9 Class III--were examined. A precision machine tool device was used to record the X-, Y-, and Z-coordinates of selected dental landmarks on all casts to 0.001 mm accuracy. The coordinates were processed through a computer curve-fitting program. The Class III mandibular arches had smaller arch depth and greater arch width (beginning in the premolar area) than the Class I arches. The Class II mandibular arches exhibited generalized reduced arch width and depth compared with the Class I arches. Maxillary arch depths were similar in all three groups. However, the Class III maxillary arch widths were greater from the lateral incisor-canine area distally compared with the Class I maxillary arch, and the Class II maxillary arch form was narrower than the Class I arch form from the lateral incisor-canine area distally. The beta function more accurately described the dental arch form than representations previously reported.
The meta-analysis technique of literature review was applied to a total of 26 previous studies to assess the longitudinal stability of postretention mandibular intercanine width. Weighted averages and standard deviations for the means of 1,233 subjects were compared for linear changes in intercanine transverse dimensions during treatment (T1), immediately after treatment (T2), and after removal of all retention (T3). Net change was defined as the difference between means at T3 and T1. Dimensional changes were also evaluated on the basis of patient pretreatment Angle classification, extraction, and nonextraction treatment modalities of each group. Paired two-tail t-tests were performed between T3 and T1 means on all groups at the a priori level of significance set at a < or = 0.05. Statistically significant differences were observed for the following groups: all patients; nonextraction; extraction; Class I; Class I extraction; Class II extraction; and, Class I Division 1 nonextraction. The findings of this study indicate that regardless of patient diagnostic and treatment modalities, mandibular intercanine width tends to expand during treatment on the order of one to two millimeters, and to contract postretention to approximately the original dimension. While statistically significant differences could be demonstrated within various groups, the magnitudes of the differences were not considered clinically important.