Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics (Feb 2011)
Estudo comparativo de complicações durante o uso do aparelho de Herbst com cantiléver e com splint inferior de acrílico removível Comparative study of complications during Herbst treatment with cantilever bite jumper and removable mandibular acrylic splint
Abstract
OBJETIVO: verificar e comparar os tipos de complicações durante o tratamento com o aparelho de Herbst com cantiléver (CBJ) e com splint removível inferior. MÉTODOS: vinte e um pacientes tratados consecutivamente com o CBJ foram comparados a vinte e um pacientes tratados consecutivamente com o aparelho de Herbst com coroas de aço nos primeiros molares superiores e com splint de acrílico inferior removível. A idade inicial média para o grupo com CBJ foi de 12 anos e 3 meses, e para o grupo com splint foi de 11 anos e 3 meses. Ambos os grupos utilizaram o aparelho por um período de 12 meses. A partir da ficha clínica dos pacientes foi realizado um levantamento de ocorrências de complicações acontecidas durante o tratamento com os aparelhos de Herbst. RESULTADOS: o número total de ocorrências de complicações foi de 24 para o grupo com CBJ e de 53 para o grupo com splint. O teste de Mann-Whitney (pOBJECTIVE: To assess and compare the type of complications during Herbst treatment with Cantilever Bite Jumper (CBJ) and removable mandibular splint. METHODS: Twenty one consecutive Herbst patients treated with the CBJ were compared with twenty one patients consecutively treated with Herbst with stainless steel crowns on the maxillary first molars and a removable mandibular acrylic splint. The initial mean age for the CBJ group was 12 years and 3 months and for the Splint group was 11 years and 3 months. Both groups used the Herbst appliance for 12 months. Based on the patients' clinical records an occurrence survey of complications during Herbst treatment was performed. RESULTS: There were 24 complications for the CBJ and 53 for the Splint group, which were statistically different (Mann-Whitney test, p<0.05). The prevalence of patients exhibiting complications during treatment was 66.67% in the CBJ and 85.71% in the Splint group. The frequencies of complications were also statistically different between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: The CBJ exhibited a significantly smaller number of complications during Herbst appliance treatment than the removable mandibular splint. Herbst appliance with first molar crowns and a cantilever on the mandibular molars is preferable to the removable mandibular acrylic splint because of savings in clinical and laboratory time.
Keywords