scholarly journals Effects of orthodontic treatment with activator appliance on patients with skeletal Class II malocclusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
pp. 0-0
Author(s):  
Jiye Xie ◽  
Chunrong Huang ◽  
Kang Yin ◽  
Juyoung Park ◽  
Yanhua Xu
2021 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 82-87
Author(s):  
Prathyaksha Shetty ◽  
Dipjyothi Baruah ◽  
Amit Rekhawat ◽  
Karthik Cariappa ◽  
Sujala Ganapati Durgekar ◽  
...  

Skeletal Class II malocclusion with mandibular deficiency is one of the most common problems that patients seek treatment. Adult patients with severe skeletal Class II malocclusion need orthognathic surgery for successful treatment. Bilateral sagittal split osteotomy (BSSO) is the most often preferred technique for these patients. This case report briefs about two male patient of age 24 years presented with Class II Skeletal relation, mesoprosopic facial form, horizontal growth pattern and Angle’s Class II div 1 malocclusion who were treated with Bilateral sagittal split osteotomy (BSSO) mandibular advancement. The ideal anteroposterior relation was established along with a Class I molar, incisor, canine relationship and ideal overjet, overbite and the overall facial esthetics were significantly improved. Combined surgical-orthodontic treatment aims to obtain a more harmonious facial, skeletal, dental and soft tissue relationship with an added patient self esteem.


2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (54) ◽  
pp. 62-72
Author(s):  
Ivan Pedro Taffarel ◽  
Fernando Augusto Casagrande ◽  
Itamar Antonio Taffarel ◽  
Thiago Martins Meira ◽  
Orlando Tanaka

Orthodontic treatment of Class II, division 1 malocclusion in one or two phases is still controversial in contemporary Orthodontics. The present clinical case presents the orthodontic treatment of a 6-year-old patient with aesthetic complaint regarding the smile and bullying, presenting skeletal Class II, Class II malocclusion, Angle division 1, overjet with exaggerated protrusion of the maxillary incisors, exaggerated overbite with the lower incisors touching the palatal mucosa, absence of lip sealing and concave inferior face profile. In Phase I, rapid maxillary expansion was performed with Hyrax-type expander together with the Herbst fixed functional orthopedic device for 11 months. In Phase II, the fixed orthodontic appliance associated with intermaxillary elastics was used for 13 months. The two-phase treatment of Class II malocclusion, division 1 showed to be effective after 24 months, establishing adequate occlusal and functional results and improving the aesthetics of the lower third of the face.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lu Liu ◽  
Qi Zhan ◽  
Jing Zhou ◽  
Qianyun Kuang ◽  
Xinyu Yan ◽  
...  

ABSTRACT Objectives To compare the effects of Forsus appliances with and without temporary anchorage devices (TADs) for patients with skeletal Class II malocclusion. Materials and Methods Through a predefined search strategy, electronic searching was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, CENTRAL, ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, and SIGLE with no language restrictions. Eligible study selection, data extraction, and evaluation of risk of bias (Cochrane Collaboration tool) were conducted by two authors independently and in duplicate. Any disagreement was solved by discussion or judged by a third reviewer. Statistical pooling, sensitivity analysis, subgroup analysis, and assessment of small-study effects were conducted by using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis and Stata 12.0. Heterogeneity was analyzed for different types of study designs, TADs, and radiographic examinations. Results Electronic search yielded a total of 256 studies after removing duplicates. Among them, six studies were finally included. All articles were of high quality. The pooled mean differences were –0.27 (95% confidence interval [CI]: –0.59, 0.05) for SNA, 0.58 (95% CI: –0.07, 1.23) for SNB, –0.86 (95% CI: –1.74, –0.03) for ANB, 1.63 (95% CI: 0.46, 2.80) for Co-Po, 0.75 (95% CI: 0.28, 1.23) for SN-MP, –7.56 (95% CI: –11.37, –3.76) for L1-MP, 0.47 (95% CI: –0.98, 1.91) for overjet, 0.39 (95% CI: –0.57, 1.35) for overbite, –1.84 (95% CI: −5.15, 1.47) for SN-OP, and 4.97 (95% CI: –1.22, 11.17) for nasolabial angle. Conclusions TADs (especially miniplates) were able to eliminate dental adverse effects of Forsus appliances for correction of skeletal Class II malocclusion.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document