Dentoskeletal and airway effects of the X-Bow appliance versus removable functional appliances (Frankel-2 and Trainer) in prepubertal Class II division 1 malocclusion patients

Summary Background/objectives Whether orthodontic treatment with functional appliances improves facial aesthetics is still under debate. This study aimed to determine whether functional orthodontic treatment improves the facial attractiveness of patients with Class II division 1 malocclusion. Materials/method Extraoral lateral photographs of 20 children with Class I (CLI, 11.7 ± 0.8 years), and before (T1) and after treatment (T2) photographs of patients with Class II division 1 (CLII T1 and CLII T2; mean age ± SD = 11.1 ± 0.6 years) treated with functional appliances, were transformed into black silhouettes. Three panels of examiners including 30 orthodontists (39.0 ± 10.1 years), 30 dentists (40.0 ± 9.7) and 30 laypersons (39.0 ± 9.2) evaluated the attractiveness of patients’ silhouettes using a 100-mm visual analogue scale, and the sagittal position of patients’ upper lip, lower lip, and chin using a 3-point Likert scale. Two-way ANOVA and a chi-square test were used to test differences among groups. Statistically significance was set as P < 0.05. Results The silhouettes of CLII T2 individuals were more attractive than those of the other groups (all Ps < 0.001). The upper lip, lower lip, and the chin of these individuals were judged to be normally positioned in 69.5 per cent, 74.9 per cent, and 72.3 per cent of the assessments, respectively (all Ps < 0.05). Limitations This study did not account for the psychological profile of the examiners, which may have affected the ratings. Conclusions/implications Orthodontic treatment with functional appliances is associated with a superior facial profile attractiveness. Functional treatment should be considered as a treatment option to improve the facial appearance of children with Class II division 1 malocclusion.

Download Full-text

Soft tissue treatment changes with fixed functional appliances and with maxillary premolar extraction in Class II division 1 malocclusion patients

European Journal of Orthodontics ◽

10.1093/ejo/cjx053 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 40 (2) ◽

pp. 214-222 ◽

Cited By ~ 4

Author(s):

Guilherme Janson ◽

Nuria Castello Branco ◽

Aron Aliaga-Del Castillo ◽

José Fernando Castanha Henriques ◽

Juliana Fernandes de Morais

Keyword(s):

Soft Tissue ◽

Class Ii ◽

Premolar Extraction ◽

Division 1 ◽

Functional Appliances ◽

Treatment Changes ◽

Class Ii Division 1

Download Full-text

Effects of Class II division 1 malocclusion treatment with three types of fixed functional appliances

Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics ◽

10.1590/2177-6709.24.5.030-039.oar ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 24 (5) ◽

pp. 30-39 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Deborah Brindeiro de Araújo Brito ◽

José Fernando Castanha Henriques ◽

Camilla Foncatti Fiedler ◽

Guilherme Janson

Keyword(s):

Class Ii ◽

Control Group ◽

Test Results ◽

Maxillary Molars ◽

Mandibular Plane ◽

Intergroup Comparison ◽

Division 1 ◽

Functional Appliances ◽

Vertical Development ◽

Class Ii Division 1

ABSTRACT Objective: This study aimed at comparing the dentoskeletal changes in patients with Class II division 1 malocclusion, treated with three types of fixed functional appliances. Methods: A sample comprising 95 patients with the same malocclusion, retrospectively selected, and divided into four groups, was used: G1 consisted of 25 patients (mean age 12.77 ± 1.24 years) treated with Jasper Jumper appliance; G2, with 25 patients (mean age 12.58 ± 1.65 years) treated with the Herbst appliance; G3, with 23 patients (mean age 12.37 ± 1.72 years) treated with the Mandibular Protraction Appliance (MPA); and a Control Group (CG) comprised of 22 untreated subjects (mean age 12.66 ± 1.12 years). Intergroup comparison was performed with ANOVA, followed by Tukey test. Results: The Jasper Jumper and the Herbst group showed significantly greater maxillary anterior displacement restriction. The Jasper Jumper demonstrated significantly greater increase in the mandibular plane angle, as compared to the control group. The MPA group demonstrated significantly greater palatal inclination of the maxillary incisors. Vertical development of the maxillary molars was significantly greater in the Herbst group. Conclusions: Despite some intergroup differences in the amount of dentoskeletal changes, the appliances were effective in correcting the main features of Class II malocclusions.

Download Full-text

Management of Class II Division 1 Malocclusion Using Fixed Functional Appliances: A Case Series

The Journal of Indian Orthodontic Society ◽

10.4103/jios.jios_33_17 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 52 (1) ◽

pp. 60-65 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Gurkeerat Singh ◽

Varun Goyal ◽

Shikha Rastogi ◽

Aswathy G Menon ◽

Sana Bint Aziz ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Case Series ◽

Class Ii ◽

Division 1 ◽

Functional Appliances ◽

Class Ii Division 1

Download Full-text

Management of Class II Division 1 Malocclusion Using Fixed Functional Appliances: A Case Series

The Journal of Indian Orthodontic Society ◽

10.1177/0974909820180110 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 52 (1) ◽

pp. 60-65

Author(s):

Gurkeerat Singh ◽

Varun Goyal ◽

Shikha Rastogi ◽

Aswathy G Menon ◽

Sana Bint Aziz ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Case Series ◽

Class Ii ◽

Division 1 ◽

Functional Appliances ◽

Class Ii Division 1

Download Full-text

Comparison of Activator-Headgear and Twin Block Treatment Approaches in Class II Division 1 Malocclusion

BioMed Research International ◽

10.1155/2017/4861924 ◽

2017 ◽

Vol 2017 ◽

pp. 1-9 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Stjepan Spalj ◽

Kate Mroz Tranesen ◽

Kari Birkeland ◽

Visnja Katic ◽

Andrej Pavlic ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Soft Tissue ◽

Skeletal Maturity ◽

Normal Growth ◽

Class Ii ◽

Twin Block ◽

Lateral Cephalograms ◽

Division 1 ◽

Functional Appliances ◽

Growth Changes ◽

Class Ii Division 1

The purpose was to compare the treatment effects of functional appliances activator-headgear (AH) and Twin Block (TB) on skeletal, dental, and soft-tissue structures in class II division 1 malocclusion with normal growth changes in untreated subjects. The sample included 50 subjects (56% females) aged 8–13 years with class II division 1 malocclusion treated with either AH (n=25) or TB (n=25) appliances. Pre- and posttreatment lateral cephalograms were evaluated and compared to 50 untreated class II division 1 cases matched by age, gender, ANB angle, and skeletal maturity. A paired sample, independent samples tests and discriminant analysis were performed for intra- and intergroup analysis. Treatment with both appliances resulted in significant reduction of skeletal and soft-tissue facial convexity, the overjet, and the prominence of the upper lip in comparison to untreated individuals (p<0.001). Retroclination of maxillary incisors and proclination of mandibular incisors were seen, the latter being significantly more evident in the TB group (p<0.05). Increase of effective mandibular length was more pronounced in the TB group. In conclusion, both AH and TB appliances contributed successfully to the correction of class II division 1 malocclusion when compared to the untreated subjects with predominantly dentoalveolar changes.

Download Full-text

Treatment of large overjet in Angle Class II: division 1 malocclusion with Andresen activators versus prefabricated functional appliances—a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial

European Journal of Orthodontics ◽

10.1093/ejo/cjv080 ◽

2015 ◽

Vol 38 (5) ◽

pp. 516-524 ◽

Cited By ~ 10

Author(s):

Emina Čirgić ◽

Heidrun Kjellberg ◽

Ken Hansen

Keyword(s):

Randomized Controlled Trial ◽

Controlled Trial ◽

Class Ii ◽

Angle Class Ii ◽

Randomized Controlled ◽

Angle Class ◽

Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial ◽

Division 1 ◽

Functional Appliances ◽

Class Ii Division 1

Download Full-text

Comparative evaluation of treatment effects between two fixed functional appliances for correction of Class II malocclusion: A single-center, randomized controlled trial

The Angle Orthodontist ◽

10.2319/071717-476.1 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 88 (3) ◽

pp. 259-266 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Vinni Arora ◽

Rekha Sharma ◽

Sonal Chowdhary

Keyword(s):

Randomized Controlled Trial ◽

Controlled Trial ◽

Class Ii ◽

Patient Comfort ◽

Class Ii Malocclusion ◽

Randomized Controlled ◽

Mandibular Molar ◽

Division 1 ◽

Functional Appliances ◽

Class Ii Division 1

ABSTRACT Objective: The objective of this study was to evaluate and compare the effects of PowerScope and Forsus in the treatment of Class II division 1 malocclusion. Materials and Methods: This was a 2-arm parallel, double-blind, randomized, controlled trial. A total of 28 Class II division 1 malocclusion patients indicated for treatment with fixed functional appliances were randomized and equally divided (n = 14) among PowerScope (American Orthodontics, Sheboygan, Wis; mean age 14.11 ± 1.3 years) and Forsus (3M Unitek Corp, Monrovia, Calif; mean age 15.5 ± 1.1 years) groups. Skeletal and dentoalveolar effects of PowerScope and Forsus were compared. The secondary outcomes were evaluation of patient comfort and operator convenience. Randomization was accomplished with a 1:1 allocation ratio, and concealment was achieved by sealed opaque envelopes. The participants and data collectors were all blinded to study group allocation. Data were analyzed for 26 patients, 13 in each group, as one patient from each group discontinued treatment. Statistical comparisons were carried out using Student's t-tests and chi square tests (P ≤ .05). Results: A significantly greater mesial mandibular movement and improvement in sagittal skeletal relation were found in the Forsus patients (P ≤ .05). The forward movement of the mandibular molar and incisors were greater in the PowerScope patients (2.3 mm and 2.80 mm) than in the Forsus patients (1.9 mm and 2.38 mm). Conclusions: Both PowerScope and Forsus are effective in correcting Class II malocclusion. The percentage of dentoalveolar effects in correcting Class II malocclusion is more for PowerScope when compared with Forsus. Patient comfort was the same with both appliances. This trial was registered.

Download Full-text

Comparative Evaluation of Hyoid Bone Position and Tongue Area with Twin Block and Forsus: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Orthodontic Journal of Nepal ◽

10.3126/ojn.v10i1.31006 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 10 (1) ◽

pp. 55-64

Author(s):

Raksha Rajput ◽

Suchita Daokar

Keyword(s):

Hyoid Bone ◽

Class Ii ◽

T Test ◽

Twin Block ◽

Equality Of Means ◽

Lateral Cephalograms ◽

Intergroup Comparison ◽

Division 1 ◽

Functional Appliances ◽

Class Ii Division 1

Introduction: Class II div 1 malocclusion is most commonly presented with retruded mandible. This backward placement of mandible pushes the tongue posteriorly and inturn impairs the position of hyoid bone and total tongue area. Correction of retruded mandible with functional appliances is also considered to have positive effect on hyoid bone position and tongue area. Aim and Objectives: The objective of this study was to evaluate and compare the effects of Twin Block and Forsus on the hyoid bone position and tongue area in the treatment of Class II division 1 malocclusion. Materials & Method: A 2-arm parallel, randomized controlled trial was designed consisting of 24 Class II division 1 malocclusion patients indicated for treatment with functional appliances. 24 patients were randomized and equally divided among Twin Block (Group A) and Forsus (Group B) group. Pre- and post functional lateral cephalograms of both groups were traced and statistically analysed using paired t-test and T test of Equality of Means. ‘p’ value of less than 0.05 was considered as statistically significant. Result: A significantly upward and forward movement of hyoid bone was found with both the appliances. Tongue area also improved with Twin Block and Forsus group. On intergroup comparison insignificant results were observed between both the appliances indicating similar effect on tongue area and hyoid bone position. Conclusion: Twin Block has more skeletal effect than Forsus, still both Twin Block and Forsus are effective in improving tongue area and forward and upward displacement of hyoid bone position while correcting Class II malocclusion.

Download Full-text