Stability of Class II correction with the pendulum appliance

Background: The process of distalization in orthodontic treatment is often very difficult. The most common method is the use of cervical headgear. However, due to poor patient compliance, it leads to poor treatment outcomes. Treatment alternatives that require minimal compliance include Jones jig, magnets, and pendulum. Objective: This study aimed to perform distalization of a maxillary molars on a bilateral Class II molar relationship patient with a crowded maxillary arch. Case Report: A 10-year-old female with a Class II molar relationship, bilateral posterior crossbite, and nonerupted upper canines was treated with a rapid palatal expander (RPE), pendulum appliance, and fixed appliance. The crowding in the maxillary arch and spacing in the mandibular arch were eliminated, and transverse discrepancies were corrected. Conclusion: Pendulum appliance is very effective in creating spaces for the eruption of canines and ectopic premolars. Pendulum appliances have been introduced for a long time and have proven successful for molar distalization and space regainer and require minimal patient cooperation. Like other distalization appliances, distal tipping of the molars and mesial movement of the premolars could be observed.

Download Full-text

Efficacy of Modified Pendulum Appliance for the Correction of Class II Malocclusion: A Clinical Study

The Journal of Indian Orthodontic Society ◽

10.4103/jios.jios_125_17 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 51 (4) ◽

pp. 250-257

Author(s):

Monika Koul ◽

Ayushi Singla ◽

Anil Singla ◽

Vivek Mahajan ◽

Harupinder Singh Jaj ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Clinical Study ◽

Class Ii ◽

Class Ii Malocclusion ◽

Pendulum Appliance

Download Full-text

CLASS II CORRECTION BY MOLAR DISTALIZATION WITH PENDULUM APPLIANCE- A CASE REPORT.

International Journal of Advanced Research ◽

10.21474/ijar01/6059 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 5 (12) ◽

pp. 1073-1081

Author(s):

AbdulBaais Akhoon ◽

◽

Mohammad Mushtaq ◽

Aasiya Ishaq ◽

◽

...

Keyword(s):

Case Report ◽

Class Ii ◽

Molar Distalization ◽

Pendulum Appliance

Download Full-text

Maxillary premolars extraction or molar distalization with or without TADs: cephalometric evaluation of soft tissue changes in Class II treatment

South European Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Research ◽

10.5937/sejodr7-23776 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 7 (1) ◽

pp. 4-11

Author(s):

Lorenz Moser ◽

Enrica Di Lorenzo ◽

Marco Serafin ◽

Giuliano Maino ◽

Ute Schneider-Moser ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Soft Tissue ◽

Class Ii ◽

Growth Spurt ◽

Class Ii Malocclusion ◽

Premolar Extraction ◽

Class Ii Treatment ◽

Lateral Cephalograms ◽

Tissue Changes ◽

Pendulum Appliance ◽

Soft Tissue Changes

Introduction: Problem solving in Class II malocclusion treatment performed with premolars extractions or distalizing techniques in relation to the profile modification. Aim: To cephalometrically compare soft tissue changes produced either by maxillary premolar extraction, tooth-borne Pendulum appliance or bone-borne MGBM appliance. Materials and Methods: Both pre- (T1) and post-treatment (T2) lateral cephalograms of 89 skeletal Class II patients (36 M, 53 F), treated during pubertal growth spurt, were retrospectively selected. Three groups were formed based on the therapy performed: 30 patients had been treated with maxillary first premolars extraction (U4), 31 patients with a conventional tooth-borne distalizing with Pendulum appliance (PA), and 28 patients with a skeletally anchored distalizing appliance (MGBM). Soft tissue was analyzed comparing upper (UL) and lower (LL) lip’s points with regard to True Vertical Line (TVL) and Esthetic plane (E-plane). Skeletal and dental values have been recorded in order to cephalometrically compare ΔT2-T1 changes among groups and to correlate dental and skeletal changes to profile modifications. One-way ANOVA was employed to compare groups at T1. Paired sample t-tests were employed to assess significant intra- and intergroup differences between T2 and T1. Significance level was set at 0.05 Results: UL and LL showed a slight but not significant retrusion relative to TVL in all three groups. UL and LL distances to E-plane were not statistically significant among U4, PA, and MGBM groups. Independently of the treatment, UL was tangent to TVL in all groups. No statistically significant differences have been shown in skeletal records. Significant differences were recorded in Overjet among U4 than PA and MGBM groups. Conclusions: Class II malocclusion treatment with maxillary first premolar extraction, conventional or skeletal distalization did not significantly affect the profile producing similar changes in the soft tissue.

Download Full-text

Class II malocclusion and ectopic canine treated with Pendulum appliance and TADs in a high-relapse potential Ehlers-Danlos patient: A case report

Journal of the World Federation of Orthodontists ◽

10.1016/j.ejwf.2020.01.003 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 9 (1) ◽

pp. 25-31

Author(s):

Dina Stappert ◽

Abrar Bakhsh ◽

Lauren Wiese

Keyword(s):

Case Report ◽

Class Ii ◽

Class Ii Malocclusion ◽

Pendulum Appliance

Download Full-text

Transverse stability of Class II malocclusion correction with the pendulum appliance

American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics ◽

10.1016/j.ajodo.2019.08.017 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 158 (3) ◽

pp. 357-362 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Luiz Eduardo Alessio Junior ◽

Renato Rodrigues de Almeida ◽

José Gregório Pelayo Guerra ◽

Olga Benário Vieira Maranhão ◽

Guilherme Janson

Keyword(s):

Class Ii ◽

Class Ii Malocclusion ◽

Transverse Stability ◽

Pendulum Appliance

Download Full-text

Comparison of the Pendulum appliance and the Jones Jig: A prospective comparative study

European Journal of Dentistry ◽

10.4103/ejd.ejd_295_16 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 11 (03) ◽

pp. 323-329 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

Sushruth Shetty ◽

Rajkumar Maurya ◽

H. V. Pruthvi Raj ◽

Anand Patil

Keyword(s):

Class Ii ◽

Class Ii Malocclusion ◽

Test Results ◽

Molar Distalization ◽

Facial Height ◽

Lateral Cephalograms ◽

Prospective Comparative Study ◽

Treatment Changes ◽

Pendulum Appliance ◽

Paired T Test

ABSTRACT Objective: To compare two molar distalization devices, the Pendulum appliance (PA) and the Jones Jig (JJ) in dental Class II patients. Materials and Methods: Pretreatment and postdistalization lateral cephalograms and study models of 20 subjects (6 males, 14 females) Class II malocclusion subjects were examined. PA and JJ group both consisted of 10 patients each with a mean pretreatment age of 12 years 1 month for females and 12 years 5 months for males. The PA and the JJ appliance were activated once in a month until Class II molar relationship was corrected to a super Class I molar relationship in both groups. Initial and final measurements and treatment changes were compared by means of Paired t-test. Results: Maxillary first molar distalized an average of 3.85 mm in the PA and 2.75 mm in the JJ between T1 and T2; rate of molar distalization was 1.59 mm/month for PA, and the JJ appliance averaged 0.88 mm/month, distal molar tipping was greater in PA (6.2°) than in the JJ (3.9°). Average mesial movement of the premolars was 2.2 mm with PA and JJ both. JJ showed a greater rotation of first molars after distalization as compared to PA. The increase in vertical facial height was also greater for JJ as compared to PA. Conclusions: Both the appliances were effective in molar distalization with PA requiring less distalization time (16 days less than JJ). Some adverse effects were noted with both which one should strive to control.

Download Full-text