Progress in orthodontics
-
Progress in orthodontics · Nov 2013
Comparative StudySkeletal and dental characteristics in subjects with ankyloglossia.
The role of ankyloglossia in etiology of malocclusion is not much discussed over the years. The aim of the present study was to assess the skeletal and dental characteristics in subjects with ankyloglossia. ⋯ Subjects with ankyloglossia had reduced maxillary and mandibular intercanine widths and reduced maxillary intermolar width. The mandibular plane angle and overbite were altered with severity of ankyloglossia.
-
Progress in orthodontics · Nov 2011
Saliva analysis by surface-enhanced laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry (SELDI-TOF-MS) in orthodontic treatment: first pilot study.
SELDI-TOF-MS (Surface-Enhanced Laser Desorption/Ionization Time-Of-Flight Mass Spectrometry) allows the generation of an accurate protein profile from minimal amounts of biological samples and may executes proteomic profile of saliva. The aim of this work is to compare the proteomic profile of saliva of patients in orthodontic treatment to the beginning of treatment and after three months by using the surface enhanced laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry (SELDI-TOF-MS) technology. ⋯ Many differences were noted in salivary proteomic profile obtained using the SELDI-TOF-MS technology in patients in orthodontic treatment to beginning and after three months. These data suggest that the proteomic analysis of saliva is a promising new tool for a non-invasive study of oral mucosa and bone changes.
-
Progress in orthodontics · Jan 2011
Comparative StudyMaxillary molar distalization: Pendulum and Fast-Back, comparison between two approaches for Class II malocclusion.
To compare the dento-alveolar and skeletal effects produced by two different molar intraoral distalization appliances, Pendulum and Fast-Back, both followed by fixed appliances, in the treatment of Class II malocclusion. ⋯ The Pendulum and the Fast-Back induce similar dentoskeletal effects. The use of the two distalization devices, therefore, can be considered clinically equivalent.