masterThesis
Evaluación de los cambios esqueléticos y dentoalveolares de acuerdo a la cefalometría de Pancherz en pacientes con maloclusión clase II tratados con aparatología advansync & herbst en la clínica de ortodoncia de la Universidad de Cuenca – prueba clínica controlada aleatorizada
Fecha
2018Autor
Gavela Guamán, Andrea del Cisne
Institución
Resumen
OBJECTIVE: The objective of the present investigation was to evaluate the skeletal and dentoalveolar changes produced by the Herbst and Advansync appliances, as a class II malocclusion treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Randomized prospective longitudinal cohort study, 30 individuals, divided into two groups ADVANSYNC (n = 15), Herbst (n = 15) of female and male with ages ranging from 11 to 18 years of age, treatments with the two appliances started and ended in the same period (10 months), evaluating the results through initial and final radiographic studies. The data were processed in the Dolphine 11.3 cephalometric program, by Pancherz cephalometry. RESULTS: In the statistical analysis the F-Fisher test was used for homogeneous variances. No significant statistical differences were observed between the T1 and T2 averages of the OLp-A, OLp-M, and OLp-I S variables (p> 0.05). On the other hand, the OLp-Pg variable presented significant differences and the variables OLp-M, OLp-I, Overjet and Molar Relatioship showed very highly significant differences between the two treatment times (p <0.001). The average percentage change of overjet with respect to the initial value was 77.8% (-5.2 mm) with the Advansync treatment and 85.5% (-6.4 mm) with the Herbst apparatus, while for The molar ratio percentages were 52.6% (-5.7 mm) and 59.2% (-6.4), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: No statistically significant differences were found between the two devices, when evaluating the skeletal and dentoalveolar changes produced in the period of time determined for the treatment of class II malocclusion, however it was observed that the Herbst device presents more favorable conditions in comparison of the Advansync device