PMC4106098_01
Lower face height (LFH) from the Ricketts lateral cephalometric analysis = angle between the planes formed by the anterior nasal spine to Xi point (ANS-Xi) and the Xi point to protuberance menti (Xi-PM). Coadjutant parameter to OVD reestablishment.
CRID2014-920840.001.jpg
PMC4106098_01_CRID2014-920840.001.jpg
fig1
In order to reestablish function, a new pair of dentures was planned for each patient, using the lower face height (LFH) from the Ricketts lateral cephalometric analysis (Figure 1) as an auxiliary parameter for the OVD reestablishment.
Lateral cephalometric radiograph of patients. (a) Patient I at baseline or T0. (b) Patient II at baseline or T0. (c) Patient I at trial insertion or T1. (d) Patient II at trial insertion or T1. (e) Patient I after four years of rehabilitation or T3. (f) Patient II after four years of rehabilitation or T3.
CRID2014-920840.002.jpg
PMC4106098_01_CRID2014-920840.002.jpg
fig2
T0, Table 1; Figures 2(a) and 2(b)). The complete denture construction followed a conventional technique, such as primary and secondary impressions, occlusal recordings with rims, and OVD measurement with Willis compass, plus the trial insertion (triple-layer pressed polymethylmethacrylate teeth, Trilux, VIPI, Pirassununga, SP, Brazil). With the trial dentures in the mouth, the patients underwent a second LCR (T1, Table 1; Figures 2(c) and 2(d)). Only four years later, the patients were able to return, when another LCR was asked of both (T3, Table 1; Figures 2(e) and 2(f)).
Images of clinical conditions of patients I and II after 4 years of rehabilitation or T3. (a) Resting posture of patient I. (b) Resting posture of patient II. (c) Facial profile of patient I. (d) Facial profile of patient II. (e) Smile of patient I. (f) Smile of patient II.
CRID2014-920840.003.jpg
PMC4106098_01_CRID2014-920840.003.jpg
fig3
Declaring no discomfort symptoms or aesthetic problems, the patients decided not to renew the complete dentures at that time (Figure 3).