EFFICACY OF TEMPORARY FIXED RETENTION FOLLOWING ...
EFFICACY OF TEMPORARY FIXED RETENTION FOLLOWING ...
EFFICACY OF TEMPORARY FIXED RETENTION FOLLOWING ...
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
malocclusion must be maintained if long-term stability is to be achieved (nonexpansionists).<br />
Angle (1907, p 63) contended that each individual had the potential for<br />
normal growth and development as evidenced by his statement, “The best<br />
balance, the best harmony, the best proportions of the mouth in its relation to the<br />
other features, requires that there shall be a full complement of teeth and that<br />
each tooth shall be made to occupy its normal position–normal growth.”<br />
Because Angle contended that long-term stability hinged on a full complement of<br />
teeth maintained in the proper occlusion, expansion was naturally incorporated<br />
into many of his treated cases. As a result, cases were often treated with<br />
acceptable dental and occlusal relationships at the expense of altered arch<br />
dimensions and facial esthetics (Tweed 1944, 1966). Because of Angle’s<br />
prominence and the influence he had in the field of orthodontics at the time, his<br />
opinions became widely accepted within the orthodontic community.<br />
Calvin Case (1911, 1921, 1964) was one of the earliest clinicians to<br />
recognize the relationship between arch dimension and stability. Case alleged<br />
that the relapse seen is some of his patients, especially in the mandibular incisors,<br />
was the result of teeth being positioned outside the natural confines of their<br />
supporting bone. In an effort to correct this, Case became the first orthodontist<br />
to extract teeth in an effort to maintain arch dimension. Shortly thereafter, Axel<br />
Lundström (1925) also recognized the importance of maintaining an adequate<br />
apical base in relationship to the teeth, and accepted tooth extraction as a means<br />
of achieving this result.<br />
McCauley (1944) stressed the importance of maintaining the intercanine<br />
width throughout treatment. It was his opinion that the Class I canine<br />
relationship (i.e. the mandibular canine travels mesial to the maxillary canine in<br />
lateral excursions) is the primary determinant of functional occlusion and arch<br />
form. McCauley (1944) also noted the importance of arch width when he<br />
recommended that because molar width and cuspid width are of such an<br />
uncompromising nature, one might establish them as fixed quantities and build<br />
the arches around them.<br />
Charles Tweed was perhaps the most notable early proponent of tooth<br />
extraction. Tweed (1944, 1945, 1952, 1966) wrote extensively on tooth extraction<br />
and the significance of the relationship of the teeth to their apical bases. Tweed<br />
was a student of Angle, who, like others at the time, became dissatisfied with not<br />
only the instability of his results, but also the facial profiles of his treated<br />
patients. Tweed felt that there was a lack of beauty and harmony associated with<br />
the face, when the teeth, particularly the lower incisors, where not placed in the<br />
proper relationship to their apical bases. So he decided to retreat 100 of his cases<br />
6