scholarly journals Class II malocclusion treatment changes with the Jones jig, Distal jet and First Class appliances

2020 ◽  
Vol 28 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lorena VILANOVA ◽  
José Fernando Castanha HENRIQUES ◽  
Mayara Paim PATEL ◽  
Rachelle Simões REIS ◽  
Roberto Henrique da Costa GREC ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Class Ii ◽  
Class Ii Malocclusion ◽  
Treatment Changes ◽  
Distal Jet

Stability of Class II malocclusion treatment with the distal jet followed by fixed appliances

2020 ◽  
Vol 158 (3) ◽  
pp. 363-370
Author(s):  
Sorileé Carlina Ramon Pujols ◽  
Cinthya Quagliato Nogueira ◽  
Rachelle Simões Reis ◽  
Camilla Fiedler Fonçatti ◽  
José Fernando Castanha Henriques ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Class Ii ◽  
Class Ii Malocclusion ◽  
Fixed Appliances ◽  
Distal Jet

scholarly journals Dental, skeletal and soft tissue effects of the Distal Jet appliance: A prospective clinical study

2019 ◽  
Vol 24 (6) ◽  
pp. 56-64 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rachelle Simões Reis ◽  
José F. C. Henriques ◽  
Guilherme Janson ◽  
Karina Maria Salvatore Freitas ◽  
Wilana Moura
Keyword(s):  
Soft Tissue ◽  
Class Ii ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Class Ii Malocclusion ◽  
Plane Angle ◽  
Tissue Effects ◽  
Mandibular Plane ◽  
Maxillary Incisors ◽  
Distal Jet ◽  
Mandibular Plane Angle

ABSTRACT Objective: This study evaluated the dental, skeletal and soft tissue effects in Class II malocclusion patients treated with Distal Jet appliance, compared to an untreated control group. Methods: 44 patients with Class II malocclusion were divided into two groups: Group 1 (experimental) - 22 patients, mean age of 12.7 years, treated with the Distal Jet appliance for a mean period of 1.2 years; Group 2 (control) - 22 untreated patients, mean age of 12.2 years, followed by a mean period of 1.2 years. Lateral cephalograms were obtained before treatment (T0) and at the end of the distalization (T1).Independent t test was used to identify intergroup differences. Results: When compared to control group, the Distal Jet produced a significant increase in mandibular plane angle (0.7 ± 2.0o). The maxillary second molars presented distal inclination (6.6 ± 3.8o), distalization (1.1 ± 1.1 mm) and extrusion (1.3 ± 2.1 mm). The maxillary first molars distalized by 1.2 ± 1.4 mm. The maxillary first premolars mesialized by 3.4 ± 1.1 mm. The maxillary incisors showed slight labial tipping of 4.3 ± 4.7o and were protruded by 2.4 ± 1.7 mm. There were no significant changes in the facial profile. The overjet increased 1.5 ± 1.1 mm and overbite had no significant changes. Conclusion: The Distal Jet appliance is effective to distalize the maxillary first molars, but promotes increase in mandibular plane angle, distal inclination, extrusion and distalization of maxillary second molars, mesialization of maxillary first premolars, proclination and protrusion of maxillary incisors, and increase in overjet, when compared to a control group.

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

2017 ◽  
Vol 11 (03) ◽  
pp. 323-329 ◽  
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.

scholarly journals Comparison between direct vs indirect anchorage in two miniscrew-supported distalizing devices

2016 ◽  
Vol 86 (3) ◽  
pp. 399-406 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mauro Cozzani ◽  
Mattia Fontana ◽  
Giuliano Maino ◽  
Giovanna Maino ◽  
Lucia Palpacelli ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Treatment Time ◽  
Class Ii ◽  
T Test ◽  
Class Ii Malocclusion ◽  
Lateral Cephalograms ◽  
Treatment Changes ◽  
The Mean ◽  
T1 And T2 ◽  
Student’S T ◽  
Student’S T Test

ABSTRACT Objective:  To compare two distalizing devices supported by palatal miniscrews, the MGBM System (MGBM) and the Distal Screw appliance (DS), in dental Class II patients. Materials and Methods:  Pretreatment (T1) and postdistalization (T2) lateral cephalograms of 53 Class II malocclusion subjects were examined. MGBM consisted of 29 patients (16 males, 13 females) with a mean pretreatment age of 12.3 ± 1.5 years; DS consisted of 24 patients (11 males, 13 females) with a mean pretreatment age of 11.3 ± 1.2 years. The mean distalization time was 6 ± 2 months for MGBM and 9 ± 2 months for DS. Initial and final measurements and treatment changes were compared by means of a Student’s t-test. Results:  Maxillary superimpositions showed that the maxillary first molar distalized an average of 5.5 mm in the MGBM and 3.2 mm in the DS between T1 and T2; distal molar tipping was greater in the MGBM (10.3°) than in the DS (3.0°). First premolar showed a mean mesial movement of 1.4 mm, with a mesial tipping of 4.4° in the MGBM; on the contrary, first premolar showed a distal movement of 2.2 mm, with a distal tipping of 6.2°, in the DS. Conclusions:  The MGBM system resulted in greater distal molar movement and less treatment time, resulting in more efficient movement than was associated with the DS; DS showed less molar tipping during distalization.

scholarly journals Treatment Effects of the Herbst Appliance in Class II Malocclusion Patients after the Growth Peak

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rodrigo Hermont Cançado ◽  
Guilherme Janson ◽  
Bryan Tompson ◽  
José Carlos de Castro Alvares ◽  
Fabrício Pinelli Valarelli ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Class Ii ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Class Ii Malocclusion ◽  
Control Groups ◽  
Lateral Cephalograms ◽  
Treatment Changes ◽  
Fixed Appliances ◽  
And Control ◽  
Experimental Group ◽  
Mandibular Incisors

Abstract Objective The aim of this study was to evaluate dentoskeletal changes in the treatment of Class II malocclusion with the Herbst Cantilever Bite Jumper (CBJ) appliance, associated with multibracket appliances after the growth peak, at pretreatment. Materials and Methods  A sample of 37 individuals was divided into two groups: the experimental group comprised 16 patients treated consecutively for a mean period of 2.52 years with the Herbst CBJ appliance associated with multibracket appliances. A total of 21 subjects (10 males and 11 females) with Class II malocclusion and mean age at T1 of 16.08 years were followed for a mean period of 2.12 years composed the control group. Comparisons between the two groups were performed using initial and final lateral cephalograms. Comparisons between experimental and control groups at pretreatment and of the treatment changes were performed by Mann–Whitney or independent t-tests. Results Experimental group exhibited a significantly greater labial inclination of the mandibular incisors in comparison to the control group. Additionally, significantly greater corrections in overbite, overjet, and molar relationship were observed in the experimental than in the control groups. Conclusion The effects of the Herbst CBJ appliance, associated with fixed appliances after the growth peak in Class II malocclusion treatment are correction in molar relationship toward a Class I relationship, decrease of the overjet, decrease of the overbite, and mandibular incisors labial inclination.

scholarly journals Class II malocclusion treatment effects with Jones Jig and Distal Jet followed by fixed appliances

2017 ◽  
Vol 88 (1) ◽  
pp. 10-19 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lorena Vilanova ◽  
José Fernando Castanha Henriques ◽  
Guilherme Janson ◽  
Mayara Paim Patel ◽  
Rachelle Simões Reis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Soft Tissue ◽  
Class Ii ◽  
Occlusal Plane ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Class Ii Malocclusion ◽  
Mandibular Incisor ◽  
Tissue Changes ◽  
Fixed Appliances ◽  
Soft Tissue Changes ◽  
Distal Jet

ABSTRACT Objectives: To compare the skeletal, dentoalveolar, and soft tissue changes in Class II malocclusion patients treated with Jones Jig and Distal Jet distalizers followed by fixed appliances. Materials and Methods: The experimental groups comprised 45 Class II malocclusion subjects divided into two groups. Group 1 consisted of 25 patients treated with the Jones Jig, and group 2 consisted of 20 patients treated with the Distal Jet. Group 3 comprised 19 untreated Class II subjects. Cephalograms were analyzed before and after orthodontic treatment. For intergroup comparisons, one-way analysis of variance and post hoc Tukey tests were performed. Results: During treatment, the experimental groups exhibited significant increases in occlusal plane inclination and maxillary second molar mesial tipping. Additionally, the molar relationship improved and overjet decreased significantly in the experimental groups. The Jones Jig group showed greater mandibular incisor proclination and greater overbite reduction than the control group. No significant intergroup differences in nasolabial angle changes were found. Conclusions: Treatment protocols using the Jones Jig and Distal Jet followed by fixed appliances were effective in correcting Class II malocclusion by means of dentoalveolar changes without significant skeletal and soft tissue changes. The experimental groups showed occlusal plane clockwise rotation and greater mesial tipping of maxillary second molars when compared to the untreated group.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document