|Date:||Monday, July 23, 2007 11:09 PM|
|From:||"ESCO automatic digest system" <LISTSERV@LISTSERV.UIC.EDU>|
|Subject:||ESCO Digest - 19 Jul 2007 to 23 Jul 2007 (#2007-61)|
There are 6 messages totalling 2873 lines in this issue.
Topics of the day:
1. Email communication
2. Root resorption
3. Impacted canines
4. Impacted Canines
5. New orthodontic free website /orthofree.com
6. Adult Impacted Canines
|Date:||Saturday, July 21, 2007 5:43 PM|
|From:||Dr ted35 <drted35@AOL.COM>|
Dear ESCO Editor,
Perhaps you will find this "article" of some interest to others. I do hope the links publish functionally.
ARCHIVES FOR ALL ISSUES OF Over-the-Wires
Over The Wires:
A POTPOURRI OF ORTHODONTIC REFLECTIONS,
PERSPECTIVES, POINTERS AND OPINIONS
Ted Rothstein, DDS PhD
"Nobody does it better."
Summer '07, #15
T opic: Communicating with your colleagues, your referring dentists and the patients in your practice by email en masse.
You have just installed that new digital pan-ceph, or mirabile dictu, a wonderful 3-D cone beam technology or completed a course on microimplants and now you want to crow. So how do you do that? It would be ideal to send each person an individual handwritten letter (using pen and ink), but you really don't even have the time to inhale. Here is the solution that works for me. Since January of 2002 I have assiduously asked for the email address of every doctor or patient I have made a contact with. I strongly advise you to begin keeping such a database if you haven't had the sense to do it as yet. Now you need your website (which is an powerful instrument of communication) to act as the postman. I use ixwebhosting.com ($10 /Mo) on the recommendation of Chris Boyd the I-T guy who services the soft and hardware needs of many of the friends and professionals that I know. (Chris Boyd, 917 204 7993, firstname.lastname@example.org ) Using the "Webmail" feature of the of the host site I was enabled to send of an important email to many parties as individuals i.e., one email for each recipient you want to communicate with. You must of course first have created your mailing database. My groupings include: Staff, Referring doctors, Orthodontist, Family and friends, Psychiatrist/other docs, Miscellaneous. In the mailing I just did, I wanted the doctors who refer patients to me to know about the introduction in to my practice of 3M-Unitek's SmartClip Straight wire system. So I selected the "Referring doctors" list and imported my SmartClip Straight Wire letter , hit the "Send" button and fait accompli ! Of course you can test the mailing by sending it to yourself to see if you have edited out the errors and it is satisfactory in all ways. Alas, as part of the learning curve I forgot one important aspect of the "test mail" feature and accidentally sent four test mailings to my colleagues... all 128 of them. Arrghh. Ps. Your email automatically will include an "Unsubscribe" button. And let it come as no surprise that some recipients will not wait one nanosecond before "UNSUBSCRIBING" or even worse, blocking any further emails from your address forever. GET OVER IT ! I suggest you limit your infobyte emails to about one every three months. For me, I have many a mile to go and in my next mailing I will send the patient version (work in progress) of "Over the Wires" before the summer has flown away.
Best regards to all,
Ted Rothstein drted.com 718 852 1551.
|Date:||Saturday, July 21, 2007 12:42 PM|
|From:||SCOTT SMORON <scottsmoron@COMCAST.NET>|
When I am re-treating a patient who has had previous ortho who has a similar
medical profile as when they were last treated (healthy 25yo v healthy 14yo,
etc.) and they had relatively insignificant root resorption, I always assume
that they should not have a chance of extreme root resorption and tell them
this. Any experiences out there contrary to this? Any research on this? I
know Dr. Musich nearby likes looking at re-treats in published
journals...are you out there?
Also, the topic of internal resorption on impacted canines has come
up...anybody out there got a good handle on that? Why on earth would the
inside have an issue...unless there was an open apex or something.
|Date:||Friday, July 20, 2007 1:48 AM|
|From:||John Mamutil <jrg@BIGPOND.NET.AU>|
|Subject:||Re: Impacted canines|
I completely agree with your comments re: these canines, except I have never asked my surgeon to tweak the canine. 90% of my cases are open exposures. The other 10% are just nightmares anyway. Gingival condition of the open exposures have never been a problem. The open exposures also lets me choose where to place the bracket and then I also know how and where to apply the traction. I now use Cone Beam and Dolphin 3D for all my canines although my surgeon is not convinced about them but at least I am in a better position to say how it should be exposed. The CBVT is simply invaluable in looking at the relationship with the lateral. The ones that don't move are often entangled with the lateral and CBVT helped me work out the vectors for one of them brilliantly.
Castle Hill AUSTRALIA
|Date:||Friday, July 20, 2007 12:53 AM|
I agree with Dr.Scott Smoron's opinion regarding that impacted canines are movable but not always easy. That is utterly true. Impacted teeth may accompany with retained deciduous teeth,(Attached files: A case of 19 Y.O. Female Pt. with an impacted canine). Impacted teeth are familiar especially in cases when deficiency of space may possibly affect the direction of permanent bud. The management of impacted teeth relevant to lack of space differs in between either orthodontically supported eruption, or extraction in case of impossible management of such a tooth.
Impacted teeth are often found in cases of cleft lip and palate, accompanied some times with other kinds of anomalies like supernumerary teeth and deformed teeth.
|Date:||Friday, July 20, 2007 9:45 AM|
|From:||Dr O Sandid <drsandido@YAHOO.FR>|
|Subject:||New orthodontic free website /orthofree.com|
We inform you about the creation af a new orthodontic free website:
www.orthofree.com Enjoy the lectures , videos and diaporamas.
To receive more information about new articles, please subscribe to the
newsletter by sendind a email to: email@example.com
If you would like to publish an innovativ case reports, please contact
Best regards Dr Eli CALLABE Dr Olivier SANDID
|Date:||Friday, July 20, 2007 2:52 AM|
|From:||Paul Thomas <PaulT@DOLPHINIMAGING.COM>|
|Subject:||Re: Adult Impacted Canines|
Scott, et al,
Since two cents is being offered on this subject, I'll add my experience as a clinician with 35+ years of experience (and full qualifications in orthodontics and oral and maxillofacial surgery). I'm afraid I've learned the hard way to be suspicious when the terms "ALWAYS and NEVER" are used in relationship to clinical care. The question remains, "which canines (or other impactions) are "not worth the effort". From my perspective, if you have to go to the effort mentioned below, the patient needs to know the odds of external/internal resorption and subsequent tooth loss. Another factor is whether the patient is having full-blown orthodontic therapy for other needs or only because their retained primary canine is finally failing and needs replacement. Scott mentions the 50% success rate cited in literature, but doesn't mention long-term prognosis. I have brought teeth into the arch using the "everything short of extraction" technique and have had 25-30% of them experience internal/external resorption and need removal/replacement. I suspect the response from disbelievers will be "you weren't doing it properly" to which I would answer in Brit-speak...bollocks! In adult patients with the recalcitrant canine (or other impacted tooth), I give them options, but they are made aware of the cost/risk/benefit of trying to "horse" the tooth into position and risk resorption versus removal and replacement with a single tooth implant. From my perspective, and from the standpoint of cost/risk/benefit, if the tooth isn't going to move with conventional orthodontic retrieval techniques, the latter approach seems to make more sense.