Northcroft Memorial Lecture 2007. A century of progress: advances in orthodontics since the foundation of the British Society for the Study of Orthodontics

References

• Northcroft G. (ed.) The teeth in relationship to the normal and abnormal growth of the jaws. In The growth of the jaws, normal and abnormal in health and disease. London: Dental Board of the United Kingdom, 1924.
   Google Scholar
• Angle EH. Treatment of malocclusion of the teeth: Angle’s system. 7th Edn. Philadelphia, PA: SS White Dental Manufacturing Company, 1907.
   Google Scholar
• Curtis EK. Orthodontics at 2000. St. Louis, MO: American Association of Orthodontists, 2000.
   Google Scholar
• Case CS. The question of extraction in orthodontia (1911). Am J Orthod 1964; 50(9): 660–91.
   Google Scholar
• Dewey M. Practical Orthodontia. St. Louis, MO: Mosby, 1914.
   Google Scholar
• Broadbent BH. The face of the normal child. Angle Orthod 1937; 7: 183–208.
   Google Scholar
• Brodie AG, Downs WB, Goldstein A, Myer E. Cephalometric appraisal of orthodontic results: a preliminary report. Angle Orthod 1938; 8: 261–65.
   Google Scholar
• Brodie AG. On the growth pattern of the human head. From the third month to the eighth year of life. Am J Anat 1941; 68: 209–62.
   Google Scholar
• Moore AW. Observations on facial growth and its clinical significance. Am J Orthod 1959; 45(6): 399–423.
   Google Scholar
• Ricketts RM. The influence of orthodontic treatment on facial growth and development. Angle Orthod 1960; 30: 103–33.
   Google Scholar
• Adams CD, Meikle MC, Norwick KW, Turpin DL. Dentofacial remodelling produced by intermaxillary forces in Macaca mulatta. Arch Oral Biol 1972; 17: 1519–35.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Droschl H. The effect of heavy orthopedic forces on the maxilla in the growing Saimiri sciureus (squirrel monkey). Am J Orthod 1973; 63: 449–61.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Triftshauser R, Walters RD. Cervical traction of the maxillae in the Macaca mulatta monkey using heavy orthopaedic force. Angle Orthod 1976; 46: 37–46.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kambara T. Dentofacial changes produced by extraoral forward force in Macaca irus. Am J Orthod 1977; 71: 249–77.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Breitner C. Bone changes resulting from experimental tooth movement. American Journal of Orthodontics and Oral Surgery 1940; 26: 521–47.
   Google Scholar
• Breitner C. Further investigations of bone changes resulting from experimental orthodontic treatment. American Journal of Orthodontics and Oral Surgery 1941; 27: 605–32.
   Google Scholar
• Baume LJ, Derischweiler H. Is the condylar growth centre responsive to orthodontic therapy? An experimental study in Macaca mulatta. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1961; 14: 347–62.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Stockli PW, Willert HG. Tissue reactions in the temporomandibular joint resulting from anterior displacement of the mandible in the monkey. Am J Orthod 1971; 60: 142–55.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Elgoyhen JC, Moyers RM, McNamara JA Jr, Riolo ML. Craniofacial adaptation to protrusive function in young rhesus monkeys. Am J Orthod 1972; 62: 469–80.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• McNamara JA Jr, Carlson DS. Quantitative analysis of temporomandibular adaptations to protrusive function. Am J Orthod 1979; 76: 593–611.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Meikle MC. Remodeling the dentofacial skeleton: the biological basis of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics. J Dent Res 2007; 86: 12–24.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Björk A. Facial growth in man, studied with the aid of metallic implants. Acta Odontol Scand 1955; 13: 9–34.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Björk A, Skieller V. Facial development and tooth eruption. An implant study at the age of puberty. Am J Orthod 1972; 62: 339–83.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Enlow DH. The human face: an account of the postnatal growth and development of the craniofacial skeleton. New York, NY: Hoeber Medical Division, 1968.
   Google Scholar
• Hunter J. The natural history of the human teeth. 2nd Edn. London: J Johnson, St Paul’s Churchyard, 1778.
   Google Scholar
• Humphry GM. On the growth of the jaws. Transactions of the Cambridge Philosophical Society 1866; 11: 1–5.
   Google Scholar
• Gans C, Northcutt G. Neural crest and the origin of vertebrates. Science 1983; 202: 268–74.
   Google Scholar
• Meikle MC. Craniofacial development, growth and evolution. Bressingham: Bateson Publishing, 2002.
   Google Scholar
• Le Douarin NM. The neural crest. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1982.
   Google Scholar
• Couly GF, Coltey PM, Le Douarin NM. The triple origin of the skull in higher vertebrates: a study in quail-chick chimeras. Development 1993; 117: 409–29.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krumlauf R. Hox genes and pattern formation in the branchial region of the vertebrate head. Trends Genet 1993; 9: 106–12.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuratani S, Matsuo I, Aizawa S. Developmental patterning and evolution of the mammalian viscerocranium: genetic insights into comparative morphology. Dev Dyn 1997; 209: 139–55.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Qiu M, Bulfone A, Ghattas I, et al. Role of the Dlx homeobox genes in proximodistal patterning of the branchial arches: mutations of Dlx-1, Dlx-2 and Dlx-1 and -2 alter morphogenesis of proximal skeletal and soft tissues derived from the first and second arches. Dev Biol 1997; 185: 165–84.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thomas BL, Sharpe PT. Patterning the murine dentition by homeobox genes. Eur J Oral Sci 1998; 106 (Suppl 1): 48–54.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sharpe PT. Homeobox genes and craniofacial development. Connect Tissue Res 1995; 32: 17–25.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Steiner CC. Is there one best orthodontic appliance? Angle Orthod 1933; 3: 277–98.
   Google Scholar
• Angle EH. The latest and best in orthodontic mechanism. Dental Cosmos 1928; 70(12): 1143–58.
   Google Scholar
• Tweed CH. Indications for the extraction of teeth in orthodontic procedure. American Journal of Orthodontics and Oral Surgery 1944; 30: 405–28.
   Google Scholar
• Hahn G. Extraction panel. Orthodontics: its objectives, past and present. American Journal of Orthodontics and Oral Surgery 1944; 30, 401–4.
   Google Scholar
• Begg PR. Stone age man’s dentition: with reference to anatomically correct occlusion, the etiology of malocclusion, and a technique for its treatment. Am J Orthod 1954; 40 (4): 298–12; 40(5): 373–83; 40(6): 462–75; 40(7): 517–31.
   Google Scholar
• Little RM, Wallen TR, Riedel RA. Stability and relapse of mandibular anterior alignment—first premolar extraction cases treated by traditional edgewise orthodontics. Am J Orthod 1981; 80: 349–65.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sadowsky C, Sakolis EI. Long-term assessment of orthodontic relapse. Am J Orthod 1982; 82: 456–63.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Andrews LF. The six keys to normal occlusion. Am J Orthod 1972; 62: 296–309.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Andrews LF. The straight-wire appliance. Origin, controversy, commentary. J Clin Orthod 1976; 10: 99–114.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Andresen V, Häupl K. Functions-kieferorthopädie: die Grundlagen des ‘norwegischen Systems’. Leipzig: H Meusser, 1936.
   Google Scholar
• Wahl N. Orthodontics in 3 millennia. Chapter 9: functional appliances to midcentury. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2006; 129: 829–33.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Herbst E. Atlas und Grundriss der Zahnärztlichen Orthopädie. Munich: JF Lehmann, 1910.
   Google Scholar
• Pancherz H. Treatment of class II malocclusions by jumping the bite with the Herbst appliance. A cephalometric investigation. Am J Orthod 1979; 76: 423–42.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Clark WJ. The twin block traction technique. Eur J Orthod 1982; 4: 129–38.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kanomi R. Mini-implant for orthodontic anchorage. J Clin Orthod 1997; 31: 763–67.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Mini/micro screw implantation for orthodontic anchorage. London: National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE), Interventional Procedures Programme, 2007, Available at: http://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/index.jsp?action=byID&o=11358 (accessed 1st February 2008).
   Google Scholar
• Sandstedt C. Einige Beiträge zur Theorie der Zahnregulierung. Nordisk Tandläkare Tidskrift 1904; 5: 236–256; 1905; 6: 1–25, 141–68.
   Google Scholar
• Meikle MC. The tissue, cellular and molecular regulation of orthodontic tooth movement: 100 years after Carl Sandstedt. Eur J Orthod 2006; 28: 221–40.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wescott DC, Pinkerton MN, Gaffey BJ, Beggs KT, Milne TJ, Meikle MC. Osteogenic gene expression by human periodontal ligament cells under cyclic tension. J Dent Res 2007; 86: 1212–16.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pinkerton MN, Wescott DC, Gaffey BJ, Beggs KT, Milne TJ, Meikle MC. Cultured human periodontal ligament cells constitutively express multiple osteotropic cytokines and growth factors, several of which are responsive to mechanical deformation. J Periodontal Res 2008; 43: 343–51.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meikle MC. The evolution of plastic and maxillofacial surgery in the twentieth century: the Dunedin connection. Surgeon 2006; 4: 325–34.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sandy JR, Williams AC, Bearn D, et al. Cleft lip and palate care in the United Kingdom—the Clinical Standards Advisory Group (CSAG) study. Part 1: background and methodology. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 2001; 38: 20–23.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Williams AC, Bearn D, Mildinhall S, et al. Cleft lip and palate care in the United Kingdom—the Clinical Standards Advisory Group (CSAG) study. Part 2: dentofacial outcomes and patient satisfaction. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 2001; 38: 24–29.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sell D, Grunwell P, Mildinhall S, et al. Cleft lip and palate care in the United Kingdom—the Clinical Standards Advisory Group (CSAG) study. Part 3: speech outcomes. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 2001; 38: 30–37.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bearn D, Mildinhall S, Murphy T, et al. Cleft lip and palate care in the United Kingdom-the Clinical Standards Advisory Group (CSAG) study. Part 4. Outcome comparisons, training and conclusions. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 2001; 38: 38–43.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trauner R, Obwegeser H. The surgical correction of mandibular prognathism and retrognathia with consideration of genioplasty. II. Operating methods for microgenia and distoclusion. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1957; 10: 899–909.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Obwegeser H. The indications for surgical correction of mandibular deformity by the sagittal splitting technique. Br J Oral Surg 1964; 2: 157–71.
   Google Scholar
• Obwegeser H. Surgical correction of small or retrodisplaced maxillae: the ‘dish-face’ deformity. J Plast Reconstr Surg 1969; 44: 351–65.
   Google Scholar
• Wolf SA. Tessier P, creator of a new surgical speciality is recipient of Jacobson Innovation Award. J Craniofac Surg 2001; 12: 98–99.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Le Fanu J. The Rise and Fall of Modern Medicine. London: Little, Brown, 1999.
   Google Scholar
• Brook PH, Shaw WC. The development of an index of orthodontic treatment priority. Eur J Orthod 1989; 11: 309–20.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Richmond S, Shaw WC, O’Brien KD, et al. The development of the PAR Index (Peer Assessment Rating): reliability and validity. Eur J Orthod 1992; 14: 125–39.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Daniels C, Richmond S. The development of the index of complexity, outcome and need (ICON). J Orthod 2000; 27: 149–69.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Travess HC, Newton JT, Sandy JR, Williams AC. The development of a patient-centred measure of the process and outcome of combined orthodontic and orthognathic treatment. J Orthod 2004; 31: 220–34.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• De Oliveira CM, Sheiham A. Orthodontic treatment and its impact on oral health-related quality of life in Brazilian adolescents. J Orthod 2004; 31: 20–27.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Shaw WC, Richmond S, Kenealy PM, Kingdom A, Worthington H. A 20-year cohort study of health gain from orthodontic treatment: psychological outcome. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2007; 132: 146–57.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hill AB. The environment and disease: association or causation? Proc Roy Soc Med 1965; 58: 295–300.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jakobsson SO. Cephalometric evaluation of treatment effects on class II, division 1 malocclusions. Am J Orthod 1967; 53: 446–57.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Nelson C, Harkness M, Herbison P. Mandibular changes during functional appliance treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1993; 104: 153–61.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tulloch JF, Phillips C, Koch G, Proffit WR. The effect of early intervention on skeletal pattern in class II malocclusion: a randomized clinical trial. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1997; 111: 391–400.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keeling SD, Wheeler TT, King GJ, et al. Anteroposterior skeletal and dental changes after early class II treatment with bionators and headgear. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1998; 113: 40–50.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Brien K, Wright J, Conboy F, et al. Effectiveness of early orthodontic treatment with the Twin-block appliance: a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial. Part 1: dental and skeletal effects. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2003; 124: 234–43.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harrison JE, O’Brien KD, Worthington HV. Orthodontic treatment for prominent upper front teeth in children. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2007; 3: CD003452.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Boas F. The growth of children. Science 1892; 19: 256–257; 19: 281–282; 20: 351–52.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Tanner JM. Growth at Adolescence, 2nd Edn. Oxford: Blackwell, 1962.
   Google Scholar
• Hägg U, Attström K. Mandibular growth estimated by four cephalometric measurements. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1992; 102: 146–52.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Meikle MC. Guest editorial: What do prospective randomized clinical trials tell us about the treatment of class II malocclusions? A personal viewpoint. Eur J Orthod 2005; 27: 105–14.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar