To extract or not to extract in orthodontics /certified fixed orthodontic courses by Indian dental academy


Published on

The Indian Dental Academy is the Leader in

continuing dental education , training dentists

in all aspects of dentistry and offering a wide

range of dental certified courses in different


Indian dental academy provides dental crown &

Bridge,rotary endodontics,fixed orthodontics,
Dental implants courses.for details pls visit ,or call

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total Views
On Slideshare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide
  • Rousseau emphasized the perfectibility of man.
  • To extract or not to extract in orthodontics /certified fixed orthodontic courses by Indian dental academy

    1. 1. METHODS OF GAINING SPACE. EXTRACTIONS INDIAN DENTAL ACADEMY Leader in continuing dental education 1
    2. 2. To Extract Or Not To Extract? Over 100yrs. • • • • Align the teeth Orthodontics: Camouflage. Other alternativeOpinions remarkably changed. Chart. 2
    3. 3. The Pre 1900 era: • Extraction: always been challenged. • • • • • • • Late 1700s, early 1800s. By late 1800s-Kinsley- judicious to extract. Edward Hartley Angle:systematized and organized. Suggested extractions in earlier works.(1887). By 1907, strongly opposed extractions. His dogmatic views dominated for next 30yrs. Extraction – crime. Odontocides 3
    4. 4. The great extraction controversy of the 1920s: Edward Angle - normal occlusion. (1899).Facial esthetics and stability potential complications. Rousseau-imperfections of modern man related to negative influence of civilization and that man could reach perfection with correct efforts.. •Inappropriate to extract, inherently capable of having a perfect dentition.( Article of faith) •Every person had potential for an ideal relationship of all 32 teeth. extraction never needed. •Skeletal elements-accommodate teeth. 4
    5. 5. 1902 article, “My belief is that if we would confer the greatest benefits upon our patients from an esthetic stand point, we must work hand in hand with nature and assist her to establish the relations of the teeth as the Creator intended they should be,& not resort to mutilation”. Prof. Edmund Wuerpel – led to his concepts of facial beauty and harmony. 5
    6. 6. • Influenced by Wolf. • Led Angle to 2 key concepts: • Skeletal growth influenced by external pressure. • Rubber bands- overcome improper jaw relationship. • Proper function of dentition key to maintaining teeth in their correct position. – “Bone growing appliance” • Relapse: failure to achieve proper occlusion. (article of faith) • Concepts challenged by Calvin Case. “although arches could be expanded,teeth aligned, neither esthetics nor stability would be satisfactory in the long term” • Widely publicized debate – Dewey and Case. 6
    7. 7. The extraction debate of 1911 • Question of extraction in orthodontia.- AJO 1964 • New School: Angle. • Rationale School: Case. • Angle- causes of malocclusion – ‘local’ • Case- based on laws of heredity- union of dissimilar types/propagation of variations • Buccal occlusion gives no indication of the real position of dentition in relation to facial outlines. 7
    8. 8. Bimax protrusion: nearly ideal occlusion extraction mandatory to improve profile. Retreated a case, after waiting to see if developing growth would harmonize the relations. Angle’s Class II : Angle’s Class III : extraction is a must. “New bone cannot be induced to grow beyond its inherent size and that ,.’. there are indications for extraction in certain forms of malocclusion” 8
    9. 9. Dewey: Ex of Negroes. Extraction of 4 – molars moved mesial, incisors proclined. “Angle was not a man to compromise with his ideals. He had to put a good fight to offset extremism in extraction, and what he said needed to be said” Leonard Bernstein- 6th edition of Angle’s book. Folk lore 9
    10. 10. Response of Calvin Case: “Extraction never resorted until certain that developing growth of other parts will not correct the dento-facial protrusion” All experienced orthodontists……. Sum up, “it seems a most senseless thing for men to fight over, when the truth is so evident; 10
    11. 11. •Angle & his followers won the debate with Case. •With passing of time,& successful treatment of many ext cases have shown that Case was more accurate in assessing the issue. •Extraction disappeared b/w world war I and II. 11
    12. 12. Reintroduction of extraction in midcentury: By, 1930’s relapse frequently seen. Charles Tweed: retreated 100 of his patients. 6 ½ yrs – philosophy of full complement of teeth. 11yrs otherwise. 70% recalled. Success rate less than 20% Stability of end result. Healthy investing tissues- longevity Masticatory efficiency. Good facial esthetics. •Findings came as a shock. 12
    13. 13. Search for stability: 3yrs – devoted to study. Mandibular incisors upright. Margolis. Retreated by Xn of 4s. Results much more stable. 1st paper published 1936. By 1940- all 100 cases. 13
    14. 14. Tweed: “ it is my opinion that it is necessary to remove dental units in all those cases where there exists a discrepancy b/w tooth structure and basal bone.” Raymond Begg: Attritional occlusion theory; lack of proximal wear. “Tooth extraction as an aid to orthodontic treatment is scientifically correct ‘.’ it simulates the natural loss of tooth substance by attrition”. By late 1940’s extraction treatment became more widely accepted. By early 1960’s more than half of American patientsextraction. 14
    15. 15. Recent trend towards non extraction: Indiscriminate use of extractions. Ortho Rx synonymous with extractions. Later criticized Arguments continued throughout 1960s Prefer fuller and more prominent lips than std of 1950s and 1960s. 15
    16. 16. Litigation: 1980s TMD problems. Witzig and Spahl- critical of bicuspid Xn. •Distalization of mandible; •Post displacement of condyles and TMDs •Recommended 7 Xn. •Studies concerning 4 Xn and TMDs. •Jason and Hasund (Norway) 60 patients •Dibbets Van der Weele (1991) 15 y study. •No relation b/w choice of Xn , type of teeth , TMD . 16
    17. 17. •Gianelly et all – position of the condyle in the fossa (12 Cl II) •Hesitant. Trend towards non extraction.. •Swing of the pendulum. 17
    18. 18. A contemporary perspective: recommendations for expansion Vs extractions: Flat lips esthetics Full lips Either acceptable More stable? stability Less stable? Either acceptable extraction Non extraction 18
    19. 19. Contemporary extraction guidelines: For ortho Xn in Class I crowding &/protrusion: •Less than 4mm- Xn rarely indicated.(severe incisor protrusion or a severe vertical discrepancy) •5-9mm: both;depends •Hard and soft tissue characteristics. •Final position of incisors. •10mm/more: Xn almost always. 19
    20. 20. Thank you For more details please visit 20