Question:
How do you tell the difference between bone destruction due to
periodontal disease and that caused by improper orthodontia?
Is the treatment the same for both?
Answer:
I had the ortho work done beginning in July of 1997.
I had no pockets and no periodontal disease when I had my teeth cleaned in
July 1997.
In December of 1998 I went to another ortho for a second opinion and he
took x-rays and then advised me to get the braces off immediately or I
would lose my teeth.
The pain I experience is high up on the roots of the upper molars and it
is an ache. The first time I ever felt this ache in my life was in the
last 9 months of orthodontic treatment. I have never had problems with
sore gums or bleeding gums or offensive breath.
I have gone to two periodontists.
The first one was all set to start with a deep cleaning to be followed by
surgery. I was still waking up at night with the aching teeth and I just
wanted to leave things alone for a while and let them settle down. He
measured 10 mm pockets through out most of my teeth.
I went to a second periodontist who has a very good reputation in the
area. On the form I filled out in his office it asked the question, "How
would you feel if you were to lose all of your teeth". My answer, "It
would be a mixed blessing".
In the consultation I had with him after x-rays were taken he said I might
want to consider getting the uppers pulled. He said as the teeth were
still sore(which he had no explanation for) he would not want to provide
any periodontal treatment. He said I would lose my teeth within 2
years(that was a year ago).
I wrote to him and asked if he thought that I should get them pulled and
he never answered the question.
He did offer that maybe I could find a dentist who would add composite to
my occlusion to establish a stable occlusion. The occlusion is a mess.
I could go to a dentist who would do this, but, he wants to do a "deep
cleaning and scaling".
There is no inclination on my part to address this in any legal way, but,
my blood pressure is very high at this point and the dentist I spoke to
said he thinks the high blood pressure could be because of the periodontal
disease that I have. The discomfort from the malocclusion and the aching I
have and prediction I will lose my teeth in the next year make this a
difficult decision for me. It doesn't make sense to just wait another year
for my teeth to fall out(they aren't loose at all now) if they can be
fixed. It doesn't make sense to have them fixed if they are going to fall
out in a year.
It seems likely to me that the ortho was too exuberant and the roots
probably got moved out of the bone. If that is the case would it make any
sense to undergo periodontal treatment?
Back to my question in my original post here:
Is the treatment the same for bone loss due to periodontal disease and
bone loss due to improper orthodontic work?
I will state emphatically that I am not going to initiate or pursue any
legal or dental board or peer review body activity in this matter. I would
like to have the whole thing make enough sense to me to decide whether to
either have treatment or not have treatment and be done with it.
If you have been diagnosed with periodontal disease, you may find the
information at this URL of some use.
http://home.att.net/~OralAllergy/
It has never been proven that periodontal disease is caused by some bacterial
infection that leads to bone loss. There are many causes of periodontal disease.
The actual cause should be identified and properly treated. This site lists some
of these causes, describes what you should do to identify the actual cause and
get the correct treatment. Correct identification of the cause of the problem
can lead to complete healing and freedom from the condition.
Oral practitioners rarely mention these other causes. The fact is that they are
not really doctors. They are not qualifed or licensed to practice any form of
general medicine. Any attempt to do so can cost them their license to practice
in their own fields. The result is that they give you the only excuse that could
possibly be within their own scope, without having to tell you they aren't
doctors. It is the only explanation that does not require a medical license and
there is no way to test for it to prove it.
You are left with the impression that you have been to the correct authority on
these matters and that your problem is accurately diagnosed and is being
properly addressed. Based on all the input that went into this web site, there
is an overwhelming feeling among all contributors that protecting their egos by
not having to admit they are not doctors is much more important to them than the
patients health. Oral practitioners are not oblivious to the other causes. They
simply don't mention them and tell you how to go about discerning the real
cause. This is seen by all the contributors to this site as very unethical.
Please feel free to pass the URL on to anyone that you know that has any
condition listed at the site.
