Year : 2022

Volume : Volume 13

Issue : Issue 3

Address for correspondence :
Dr. Swati Agrawal
swatiagrawal@gmail.com

Abstract

The role of extractions in orthodontics has been a controversial subject for over a century. In the early twentieth century, Angle favored nonextraction orthodontic treatment believing that all teeth could be accommodated in the jaws in ideal occlusion with first molars in Class I occlusion. This was criticized by Calvin Case who believed extractions were necessary to relieve crowding and aid stability of treatment. Tweed, one of Angle’s brightest disciples faithfully followed his master’s recommendation to perform treatment without extractions but soon noted that many of his cases relapsed. Tweed in the United States and Raymond Begg in Australia reintroduced extraction into orthodontics in the 1940s and 1950s to enhance facial esthetics and achieve better stability of the occlusal relationships. This led to changes in the goals of orthodontic treatment, which now focus on facial proportions and the impact of the dentition on facial appearance. The soft tissue paradigm states that both the goals and limitations of orthodontic treatment are determined by the soft tissues of the face, not by the teeth and bones, and orthodontic extractions may be necessary to bring about the desired results of the orthodontic treatment. This article reviews recent take on controversies of orthodontic extractions.

Keywords: Orthodontic extraction, Orthodontic treatment, Extraction pattern.