Download PDF
Informationen aus Orthodontie & Kieferorthopädie 2019; 51(04): 271-275
DOI: 10.1055/a-0995-6396
Übersichtsartikel
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Lückenschluss im Unterkiefer durch Hemisektion der 2. Milchmolaren

Space Closure by Means of Hemisection of the 2nd Primary Molars
Jörg Glockengießer
1   Kieferorthopädische Fachpraxis, Salzburg, Österreich
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
03 December 2019 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Zusammenfassung

Bei Nichtanlagen im Unterkiefer müssen sich Behandler und Patient zwischen einem Lückenschluss, einer (implantat)-prothetischen Versorgung oder dem Belassen des Milchzahnes entscheiden. Es bestehen für jede Art der Versorgung Vor- und Nachteile, die in der kieferorthopädischen Literatur seit Jahrzehnten gegeneinander abgewogen werden. Fällt die Entscheidung zu Gunsten eines Lückenschlusses aus, besteht die Möglichkeit, diesen durch frühzeitige Hemisektion des 2. Milchmolars zu erleichtern und die Dauer der späteren Multibrackettherapie zu reduzieren. Der Artikel beschreibt die Methode und verdeutlicht wichtige anhand eines klinischen Beispiels.

Abstract

Confronted with agenesis in the lower jaw, practitioner and patient must decide between space closure, (implant-)prosthetic restoration or keeping the deciduous tooth. There are advantages and disadvantages for each type of treatment which have been weighed against each other in orthodontic literature for decades. If the decision is in favor of space closure, it is possible to accomplish this by early hemisection of the 2nd primary molar and thus reducing the duration of subsequent multibracket treatment. The article describes the method involving hemisection and illustrates important aspects by a clinical example.

Schlüsselwörter

Hemisektion - Nichtanlagen - Lückenschluss

Key words

Hemisection - agenesis - space closure
 

  • Literatur

  • 1 Czochrowska EM, Stenvik A, Bjercke B, Zachrisson BU. Outcome of tooth transplantation survival and success rates 17–41 years posttreatment. Am J Orhod Dentofacial Orthop 2002; 121: 110-119
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Van der Linden F. Problems and Procedures in Dentofacial Orthopedics. Chicago: Quintessence Publishing; 1990: 288-289
    Google Scholar
  • 3 Northway WM. The nuts and bolts of hemisection treatment: Managing congenitally missing mandibular second premolars. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2005; 127: 606-610
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Northway WM. Hemisection: One Large Step Toward Management of Congenitally Missing Lower Second Premolars. Angle Orthod 2004; 74: 792-799
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Valencia R, Saadia M, Grinberg G. Controlled slicing in the management of congenitally missing second premolars. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2004; 125: 537-543
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Van der Weijden F, Dell’Acqua F, Slot DE. Alveolar bone dimensional changes of post-extraction sockets in humans :a systematic review. J Clin Periodontol 2009; 36: 1048-1058
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Mamopoulou A, Hägg U, Schröder U. et al. Agenesis of mandibular second premolars. Spontaneous space closure after extraction therapy: a 4-year follow-up. Eur J Orthod 1996; 18: 589-600
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Zimmer B, Guitard Y. Orthodontic Space Closure without Contralateral Extraction through Mesial Movement of Lower Molars in Patients with Aplastic Lower Second Premolars. J Orofac Orthop/Fortschr Kieferorthop 2001; 62: 350-366
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Chalakkal P, de Ataide IN, Akkara F. et al. Modified serial extraction in a case with missing mandibular second premolars and a brief review of related treatment modalities. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2013; 31: 126-131
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Leung MT-C, Lee TC-K, Rabie ABM. et al. Use of Miniscrews and Miniplates in Orthodontics. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2008; 66: 1461-1466
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Tischinger T. Full-Face Orthopedics with Full-Face Orthopedics with One Multifunctional Appliance, One Multifunctional Appliance, No Cooperation Required: In Pursuit of the Class I Face. World J Orthod 2000; 1: 32-44
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Fiorentino G, Melsen B. Asymmetric mandibular space closure. Journal of Clinical Orthodontics 1996; 30: 519-523
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Zimmer B, Schelper I, Seifi-Shirvandeh N. Localized orthodontic space closure for unilateral aplasia of lower second premolars. Eur J Orthod 2007; 29: 210-216
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Bjerklin K, Bennett J. The long-term survival of lower second primary molars in subjects with agenesis of the premolars. Eur J Orthod 2000; 22: 245-255
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Bjerklin K, Al-Najjar M, Kårestedt H. et al. Agenesis of mandibular second premolars with retained primary molars. A longitudinal radiographic study of 99 subjects from 12 years of age to adulthood. Eur J Orthod 2008; 30: 254-261
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Bicakci AA, Doruk C, Babacan H. Late development of a mandibular second premolar. Korean J Orthod 2012; 42: 94-98
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Aichinger C. Persönliche Kommunikation. 2017
    PubMed
  • 18 Glockengießer J. Lückenschluss durch Hemisektion bei Nichtanlagen unterer Prämolaren. Kieferorthopädie 2015; 29: 61-66
    PubMedGoogle Scholar