Revisión sistemática: cantidad y periodicidad de las radiografías, fotografías y modelos de estudio para el seguimiento en los tratamientos de ortodoncia.

Claudia Luna; Andrés Felipe Sánchez; Alexandra Ortiz; Zulma Vanessa Rueda; Paola Botero

Systematic review : quantity and frequency of radiographies, photographies and dental models taken for the monitoring of orthodontic treatments

Review Article

Claudia Luna Ver Biografía

Universidad Cooperativa de Colombia, sede Medellín

Andrés Felipe Sánchez Ver Biografía

Universidad Cooperativa de Colombia

Alexandra Ortiz Ver Biografía

Universidad Cooperativa de Colombia.

Zulma Vanessa Rueda Ver Biografía

Universidad Pontificia Bolivariana

Paola Botero Ver Biografía

Universidad Cooperativa de Colombia

Introduction: the objective of this research was to identify in the available literature the amount and frequency of radiographies, photographs, and casts made to follow-up patients undergoing orthodontic treatment.

Materials and methods: a systematic review that consisted of an electronic database search was performed to find articles that included the description of the frequency and amount of panoramic and lateral cephalic radiographies, photographs, and casts in their methodology. We included cohort and case-control studies, as well as clinical trials, limiting our analysis to papers available in English or Spanish. We applied the Jadad score and the NewcastleOttawa scale to the selected papers to establish their methodological quality. In addition, we determined the age of the subjects in the experimental groups in order to identify the type of orthodontic treatment, whether it was interceptive or corrective.

Results: the search yielded 342 articles in total, identified by the information contained in the title and abstract. 273 articles were excluded due to different reasons, such as being irrelevant to the topic, language, study type, or lack of access to the full-text article. 60 articles were finally included in the review.

Conclusions: despite the heterogeneity among the included studies, a consensus among the authors on the amount and frequency of orthodontic records was possible. Records taken at the beginning or pre-treatment, after six months of treatment, a year into treatment, when appliances are removed, and two years after the treatment has finished are recommended for interceptive treatments. For corrective treatment, it is suggested that records be taken at the beginning or pre-treatment, a year into the treatment, when the treatment is finished, and two years after the treatment is finished.

Keywords: cephalometry, dental photography, dental models, panoramic radiography

Miller JB, Burch JG. Criteria and procedures for cast trimming. J Prosthet Dent. 1973; 30: 843-9.

Quintero JC, Trosien A, Hatcher D, Kapila S. Craniofacial imaging in orthodontics: historical perspective, current status, and future developments. Angle Orthod. 1999; 69: 491-506.

Sandler J, Murray A. Clinical photography in orthodontics. J Clin Orthod. 1997; 31: 729-39.

Williamson J. Orthodontic records: more than just models and photos. Int J Orthod Milwaukee. 2003; 14: 33.

Sjogren AP, Lindgren JE, Huggare JA. Orthodontic study cast analysis: reproducibility of recordings and agreement between conventional and 3D virtual measurements. J Digit Imaging. 2009; 23: 482-92.

Bondemark L. Interdental bone changes after orthodontic treatment: a 5-year longitudinal study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1998; 114: 25-31.

Hesby RM, Marshall SD, Dawson DV, Southard KA, Casko JS, Franciscus RG et al. Transverse skeletal and dentoalveolar changes during growth. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2006; 130: 721-31.

Shorey R, Moore K. Clinical digital photography: implementation of clinical photography for everyday practice. J Calif Dent Assoc. 2009; 37: 179-83.

Palomo JM, Wolf GR, Hans MG. Use of digital photography in the case orthodontic clinic. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2004; 126: 381-5.

Hujoel P, Hollender L, Bollen AM, Young JD, McGee M, Grosso A. Radiographs associated with one episode of orthodontic therapy. J Dent Educ. 2006; 70: 1061-5.

Ghafari J, Cater PE, Shofer FS. Effect of film-object distance on posteroanterior cephalometric measurements: suggestions for standardized cephalometric methods. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1995; 108: 30-7.

Clarke M OA. Manual del Revisor Cochrane 4.1.6. Oxford: Update Software; 2003.

Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, Jenkinson C, Reynolds DJ, Gavaghan DJ et al. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary? Control Clin Trials. 1996; 17: 1-

Wells GA SB, O’Connell D. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (nos) for assessing the quality of nonrandomised studies in meta-analyses. Eur J Epidemiol. 2010; 25(9): 603-5.

Das UM, Reddy D. Treatment effects produced by preorthodontic trainer appliance in patients with class II division I malocclusion. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent. 2010; 28: 30-3.

Yüksel S, Kaygisiz E, Ulusoy C, Keykubat A. Posttreatment evaluation of a magnetic activator device in Class II high-angle malocclusions. Eur J Orthod. 2010; 32: 425-9.

Flores-Mir C, Barnett G, Higgins DW, Heo G, Major PW. Short-term skeletal and dental effects of the Xbow appliance as measured on lateral cephalograms. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2009; 136: 822-32.

Woods MG. Sagittal mandibular changes with overbite correction in subjects with different mandibular growth directions: late mixed-dentition treatment effects. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2008; 133: 388-94.

Phan KL, Bendeus M, Hagg U, Hansen K, Rabie AB. Comparison of the headgear activator and Herbst appliance--effects and post-treatment changes. Eur J Orthod. 2006; 28: 594-604.

Altug Z, Arslan AD. Skeletal and dental effects of a mini maxillary protraction appliance. Angle Orthod. 2006; 76: 360-8.

Pirttiniemi P, Kantomaa T, Mantysaari R, Pykalainen A, Krusinskiene V, Laitala T et al. The effects of early headgear treatment on dental arches and craniofacial morphology: an 8 year report of a randomized study. Eur J Orthod. 2005; 27: 429-36.

Ko YI, Baek SH, Mah J, Yang WS. Determinants of successful chincup therapy in skeletal class III malocclusion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2004; 126: 33-41.

Baccetti T, Franchi L, McNamara JA Jr. Cephalometric variables predicting the long-term success or failure of combined rapid maxillary expansion and facial mask therapy. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2004; 126: 16-22.

Almeida MR, Henriques JF, Almeida RR, Almeida- Pedrin RR, Ursi W. Treatment effects produced by the Bionator appliance. Comparison with an untreated Class II sample. Eur J Orthod. 2004; 26: 65-72.

Janson GR, Toruno JL, Martins DR, Henriques JF, de Freitas MR. Class II treatment effects of the Frankel appliance. Eur J Orthod. 2003; 25: 301-9.

Ferro A, Nucci LP, Ferro F, Gallo C. Long-term stability of skeletal Class III patients treated with splints, Class III elastics, and chincup. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2003; 123: 423-34.

Westwood PV, McNamara JA, Jr., Baccetti T, Franchi L, Sarver DM. Long-term effects of Class III treatment with rapid maxillary expansion and facemask therapy followed by fixed appliances. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2003; 123: 306-20.

Bendeus M, Hagg U, Rabie B. Growth and treatment changes in patients treated with a headgear-activator appliance. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2002; 121: 376-84.

Junkin JB, Andria LM. Comparative long term posttreatment changes in hyperdivergent Class II Division 1 patients with early cervical traction treatment. Angle Orthod. 2002; 72: 5-14.

Mills CM, McCulloch KJ. Postreatment changes after successful correction of Class II malocclusions with the

twin block appliance. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2000; 118: 24-33.

Sung SJ, Baik HS. Assessment of skeletal and dental changes by maxillary protraction. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1998; 114: 492-502.

Garattini G, Levrini L, Crozzoli P, Levrini A. Skeletal and dental modifications produced by the Bionator III appliance. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1998; 114: 40-4.

Lund DI, Sandler PJ. The effects of Twin Blocks: a prospective controlled study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1998; 113: 104-10.

Hansen K, Koutsonas TG, Pancherz H. Long-term effects of Herbst treatment on the mandibular incisor segment: a cephalometric and biometric investigation. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1997; 112: 92-103.

Omblus J, Malmgren O, Pancherz H, Hagg U, Hansen K. Long-term effects of Class II correction in Herbst and Bass therapy. Eur J Orthod. 1997; 19: 185-93.

Ngan P, Hagg U, Yiu C, Merwin D, Wei SH. Soft tissue and dentoskeletal profile changes associated with maxillary expansion and protraction headgear treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1996; 109: 38-49.

Kopecky GR, Fishman LS. Timing of cervical headgear treatment based on skeletal maturation. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1993; 104: 162-9.

Pancherz H, Anehus-Pancherz M. The headgear effect of the Herbst appliance: a cephalometric long-term study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1993; 103: 510-20.

Lu YC, Tanne K, Hirano Y, Sakuda M. Craniofacial morphology of adolescent mandibular prognathism. Angle Orthod. 1993; 63: 277-82.

Sakamoto T, Iwase I, Uka A, Nakamura S. A roentgenocephalometric study of skeletal changes during and after chin cup treatment. Am J Orthod. 1984; 85: 341-50.

Lerstøl M, Torget O, Vandevska-Radunovic V. Longterm stability of dentoalveolar and skeletal changes after activator-headgear treatment. Eur J Orthod. 2009; 32: 28-35.

Lima Filho RM, Lima AL, de Oliveira Ruellas AC. Longitudinal study of anteroposterior and vertical maxillary changes in skeletal class II patients treated with Kloehn cervical headgear. Angle Orthod. 2003; 73: 187-93.

Tahmina K, Tanaka E, Tanne K. Craniofacial morphology in orthodontically treated patients of class III malocclusion with stable and unstable treatment outcomes. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2000; 117: 681-90.

Arman A, Ufuk Toygar T, Abuhijleh E. Evaluation of maxillary protraction and fixed appliance therapy in Class III patients. Eur J Orthod. 2006; 28: 383-92.

Nohadani N, Ruf S. Assessment of vertical facial and dentoalveolar changes using panoramic radiography. Eur J Orthod. 2008; 30: 262-8.

Reddy P, Kharbanda OP, Duggal R, Parkash H. Skeletal and dental changes with nonextraction Begg mechanotherapy in patients with Class II division 1 malocclusion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2000; 118:

-8.

Nelson B, Hansen K, Hagg U. Overjet reduction and molar correction in fixed appliance treatment of Class II, division 1, malocclusions: sagittal and vertical components. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1999; 115: 13-23.

Jakobsone G, Stenvik A, Sandvik L, Espeland L. Three-year follow-up of bimaxillary surgery to correct skeletal Class III malocclusion: stability and risk factors for relapse. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2011; 139: 80-9.

Jensen U, Ruf S. Success rate of anterior open-bite orthodontic-orthognathic surgical treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2010; 138: 716-9.

Kuroda S, Yamada K, Deguchi T, Kyung HM, Takano- Yamamoto T. Class II malocclusion treated with miniscrew anchorage: comparison with traditional orthodontic mechanics outcomes. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2009; 135: 302-9.

Joss CU, Thüer UW. Stability of hard tissue profile after mandibular setback in sagittal split osteotomies: a longitudinal and long-term follow-up study. Eur J Orthod. 2008; 30: 352-8.

Benson PE, Tinsley D, O’Dwyer JJ, Majumdar A, Doyle P, Sandler PJ. Midpalatal implants vs headgear for orthodontic anchorage: a randomized clinical trial: cephalometric results. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2007; 132: 606-15.

Schütz-Fransson U, Bjerklin K, Lindsten R. Long-term follow-up of orthodontically treated deep bite patients. Eur J Orthod. 2006; 28: 503-12.

Heiser W, Niederwanger A, Bancher B, Bittermann G, Neunteufel N, Kulmer S. Three-dimensional dental arch and palatal form changes after extraction and nonextraction treatment. Part 1. Arch length and area. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2004; 126: 71-81.

Shannon KR, Nanda RS. Changes in the curve of Spee with treatment and at 2 years posttreatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2004; 125: 589-96.

Swinnen K, Politis C, Willems G, De Bruyne I, Fieuws S, Heidbuchel K et al. Skeletal and dento-alveolar stability after surgical-orthodontic treatment of anterior open bite: a retrospective study. Eur J Orthod. 2001; 23: 547-57.

Mobarak KA, Espeland L, Krogstad O, Lyberg T. Soft tissue profile changes following mandibular advancement surgery: predictability and long-term outcome. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2001; 119: 353-

Fischer K, von Konow L, Brattstrom V. Open bite: stability after bimaxillary surgery: 2-year treatment outcomes in 58 patients. Eur J Orthod. 2000; 22: 711-8.

Zierhut EC, Joondeph DR, Artun J, Little RM. Longterm profile changes associated with successfully treated extraction and nonextraction Class II division 1 malocclusions. Angle Orthod. 2000; 70: 208-19.

Faerovig E, Zachrisson BU. Effects of mandibular incisor extraction on anterior occlusion in adults with Class III malocclusion and reduced overbite. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1999; 115: 113-24.

Sadowsky C, Schneider BJ, BeGole EA, Tahir E. Long-term stability after orthodontic treatment: nonextraction with prolonged retention. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1994; 106: 243-9.

Ormiston JP, Huang GJ, Little RM, Decker JD, Seuk GD. Retrospective analysis of long-term stable and unstable orthodontic treatment outcomes. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2005; 128: 568-74.

Deguchi T, Honjo T, Fukunaga T, Miyawaki S, Roberts WE, Takano-Yamamoto T. Clinical assessment of orthodontic outcomes with the peer assessment rating, discrepancy index, objective grading system, and comprehensive clinical assessment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2005; 127: 434-43.

Mayoral G. Treatment results with light wires studied by panoramic radiography. Am J Orthod. 1982; 81: 489-97.

Bock N, Ruf S. Post-treatment occlusal changes in Class II division 2 subjects treated with the Herbst appliance. Eur J Orthod. 2008; 30: 606-13.

Elms TN, Buschang PH, Alexander RG. Long-term stability of Class II, division 1, nonextraction cervical face-bow therapy: I. Model analysis. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1996; 109: 271-6.

McNamara JA, Jr., Baccetti T, Franchi L, Herberger TA. Rapid maxillary expansion followed by fixed appliances: a long-term evaluation of changes in arch dimensions. Angle Orthod. 2003; 73: 344-53.

Bock NC, von Bremen J, Ruf S. Occlusal stability of adult Class II Division 1 treatment with the Herbst appliance. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2010; 138: 146-51.

Memikoglu TU, Iseri H. Effects of a bonded rapid maxillary expansion appliance during orthodontic treatment. Angle Orthod. 1999; 69: 251-6.

Andrén A, Naraghi S, Mohlin BO, Kjellberg H. Pattern and amount of change after orthodontic correction of upper front teeth 7 years postretention. Angle Orthod. 2010; 80: 432-7.

Magnusson A, Bjerklin K, Nilsson P, Marcusson A. Surgically assisted rapid maxillary expansion: long-term stability. Eur J Orthod. 2009; 31: 142-9.

Renkema AM, Al-Assad S, Bronkhorst E, Weindel S, Katsaros C, Lisson JA. Effectiveness of lingual retainers bonded to the canines in preventing mandibular incisor relapse. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2008;

(179e): 171-8.

Al Yami EA, Kuijpers-Jagtman AM, van ‘t Hof MA. Stability of orthodontic treatment outcome: follow-up until 10 years postretention. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1999; 115: 300-4.

Greenblatt C, Berryman R, Brooks SL, Burton B, Murdoch-Kinch CA, Rachlin JA et al. The selection of patients for dental radiographic examinations, 2004. Chicago: American Dental Association, U.S. Department of Health And Human Services; 2004.

Systematic review: quantity and frequency of radiographies, photographies and dental models taken for the monitoring of orthodontic treatments. (2014). Revista Nacional De Odontología, 8(14), 46-61. https://revistas.ucc.edu.co/index.php/od/article/view/283

Download Citation

Every single author of the articles has to declare that is an original unpublished work exclusively created by them, that it has not been submitted for simultaneous evaluation by another publication and that there is no impediment of any kind for concession of the rights provided for in the contract.

In this sense, the authors committed to await the result of the evaluation by the journal Revista Nacional de Odontologia before considering its submission to another medium; in case the response by that publication is positive, additionally, the authors committed to respond for any action involving claims, plagiarism or any other kind of claim that could be made by third parties.

At the same time, the authors have to declare that they are completely in agreement with the conditions presented in their work and that they cede all patrimonial rights. These rights involve reproduction, public communication, distribution, dissemination, transformation, making it available and all forms of exploitation of the work using any medium or procedure, during the term of the legal protection of the work and in every country in the world, to the Universidad Cooperativa de Colombia Press.

Systematic review : quantity and frequency of radiographies, photographies and dental models taken for the monitoring of orthodontic treatments

Most read articles by the same author(s)