europeaneuropean society of society of lingual orthodontics · 2015-07-21 · lingual orthodontics...

EuropeanEuropean Society ofSociety ofLingual Orthodontics Lingual Orthodontics

Patient: Quijada S.

Applicant: Last Name: BECKER First Name: Germain1

RÉSUMÉ OF CASERÉSUMÉ OF CASE

Before

After Active

2

DIAGNOSTIC DESCRIPTION OF THE MALOCCLUSION

Diagnostic:• Age: 42 years – Gender: FemalePatient’s Chiefcomplaint

– 12, 22 rotation– Lower cuspids’ dysharmony– Former 32’s extraction

3

February 2007y

Facial Photographs4

Facial Photographs

February 2007y

5Intra – oral photos

February 2007y

6Skull X-ray

Analyse céphalométrique (Tweed) SCHutz 1Type morphologique

Sens vertical Type squelettique Sens sagittal Type esthétique

NORMES VALEURS CLINIQUES

DIAGNOSTIC

FMA 25° +- 3° 24° Normodivergente

Axe Y 60° 60° Confirme la normodivergence

FMIA 67° +-3° 60° Incisive inférieure bien placé sur sa base

AO BO 2mm 3 mm Classe II squelettiqueAO-BO -2mm -+2mm

3 mm Classe II squelettique

SNA 82° +-2° 84° Normomaxillie

SNB 80° 2° 80° N dib liSNB 80° +-2° 80° Normomandibulie

ANB 2° 4° Classe II squelettique

I/Fr 107° 117° Vestibuloversion incisive supérieure

I/i 135° 125° Bipro

ImPA 90° +-3° 96° Vestibuloversion incisive inférieure

Angle Z 75° +-3° 77° Harmonie facial

Index Hfp / Hfa

0,69 0,73 Index de difficulté

February 2007y

Panoramic X-ray

9

RADIOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS BEFORE TREATMENT

• 1- 4 wisdom teeth2 P i d ti li it d• 2- Periodontics: limitedbone loss, low risk

11

LINGUAL TREATMENT PLAN AND REASON FOR IT

1 UA & LA t i i• 1- UA & LA stripping• 2- Leveling & uprighting• 3- rotations: 12, 22, 33, 43• 4- Archs’ coordination• 5- retention

12

RÉSUMÉ OF THE LINGUAL ORTHODONTICRÉSUMÉ OF THE LINGUAL ORTHODONTICTREATMENT CARRIED OUT INCLUDING ANY

DIFFICULTIES ENCOUNTEREDDIFFICULTIES ENCOUNTERED

• 1- 33 43 took more time than estimated1 33, 43 took more time than estimated• 2- Lower midline not possible, only 3 incisors• 3- Nice success in Class I cuspid relationship• 3- Nice success in Class I cuspid relationship

(3 lower incisors

13

March 2007

14aIntra – oral photos

November 2007

14bIntra – oral photos

June 2008

14…Intra – oral photos

October 2008

Facial Photographs15

Facial Photographs

October 2008

16Intra – oral photos

October 2008

17Skull X-ray

Analyse céphalométrique (Tweed) SCHUTZ 2Type morphologique

Sens vertical Type squelettique Sens sagittal Type esthétique

NORMES VALEURS CLINIQUES

DIAGNOSTIC

FMA 25° +- 3° 24° Normodivergente

Axe Y 60° 60° Confirme la normodivergence

FMIA 67° +-3° 66° Incisive inférieure bien placé sur sa base

AO BO 2mm 2 mm Classe I squelettiqueAO-BO -2mm -+2mm

2 mm Classe I squelettique

SNA 82° +-2° 83° Normomaxillie

SNB 80° 2° 81° N dib liSNB 80° +-2° 81° Normomandibulie

ANB 2° 2° Classe I squelettique

I/Fr 107° 110° Normoversion incisive supérieure

I/i 135° 130° Norme

ImPA 90° +-3° 92° Normoversion incisive inférieure

Angle Z 75° +-3° 78° Harmonie facial

PERIAPICAL OR PANORAMIC RADIOGRAPHS ATCOMPLETION OF TREATMENTCOMPLETION OF TREATMENT

Panoramic X-ray

20

RADIOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS AT COMPLETION OF TREATMENT

• 1- No periodontic problem occured• 2- 4 wisdom teeth extractions to be planned

21

RESULTDESCRIPTION

• Treatment time: 15 months• 1 33 43 took more time than estimated• 1- 33, 43 took more time than estimated• 2- Lower midline not possible, only 3 p , y

incisors3 Ni i Cl I id• 3- Nice success in Class I cuspid relationship (3 lower incisors)p ( )

22

Intra oral Tx - Result StudyIntra oral Tx Result Study

22b

Intra oral Occlusal Tx - Result Studyy

22c

Facial Tx - Result Study

Smile

Smile

22d