Anterior maxillary dentoalveolar and skeletal cephalometric factors involved in upper incisor crown exposure in subjects with Class II and III skeletal open bite

Objective:To compare the anterior dentoalveolar and skeletal maxillary cephalometric factors involved in excessive upper incisor crown exposure (UICE) in subjects with skeletal open bite Class II (SOBCIIG) and Class III (SOBCIIIG) against an untreated control group (CG).Materials and Methods:Seventy pretreatment lateral cephalograms of orthodontic young adult patients (34 men, 36 women) were examined. The sample was divided into three groups according to both sagittal and vertical growth pattern and occlusion. The CG group (n  =  25) included Class I, normodivergent cases with adequate overbite, and the SOBCIIG group (n  =  25) and SOBCIIIG group (n  =  20) included skeletal Class II or III malocclusions, respectively, with hyperdivergent pattern and negative overbite. Several cephalometric measurements were considered (skeletal and dental). Analysis of variance, multivariate analysis of covariance, and Tukey HSD post hoc tests were used. Principal component analysis (PCA) was used for reducing the number of cephalometric variables related to UICE. Finally, a multiple linear regression was calculated.Results:Significant differences in UICE were found between the groups (P < .05). UICE was 3.9 mm in SOBCIIG, 2.5 mm in SOBCIIIG, and 0.4 mm in CG. PCA showed that a nondental component—including vertical maxillary height (VMH) and upper lip height (ULH)—was the only component significantly associated with UICE. The regression model had a moderate prediction capability.Conclusions:Although the UICE was statistically different in SOBCIIG, the values were within the esthetic standards. The UICE was mainly influenced by VMH and ULH.     

Maxillary anterior alignment stability in Class I and Class II malocclusions treated with or without extraction

Objective:To compare the postretention stability of maxillary incisors alignment in subjects with Class I and II malocclusion treated with or without extractions.Materials and Methods:The sample comprised 103 subjects with initial maxillary anterior irregularity greater than 3 mm and was divided into four groups: group 1 comprised 19 patients with Class I malocclusion treated with nonextraction (mean initial age = 13.06 years); group 2 comprised 19 patients with Class II malocclusion treated with nonextraction (mean initial age = 12.54 years); group 3 comprised 30 patients with Class I malocclusion treated with extractions (mean initial age = 13.16 years); group 4 comprised 35 patients with Class II malocclusion treated with extractions (mean initial age = 12.99 years). Dental casts were obtained at three different stages: pretreatment (T1), posttreatment (T2), and long-term posttreatment (T3). Maxillary incisor irregularity and arch dimensions were evaluated. Intergroup comparisons were performed by one-way analysis of variance followed by Tukey tests.Results:In the long-term posttreatment period, relapse of maxillary crowding and arch dimensions was similar in all groups.Conclusion:Changes in maxillary anterior alignment in Class I and Class II malocclusions treated with nonextractions and with extractions were similar in the long-term posttreatment period.     

Treatment Effects of Twin-Block and Mandibular Protraction Appliance-IV in the Correction of Class II Malocclusion

Objective:To evaluate the treatment effects of twin-block and Mandibular Protraction Appliance-IV (MPA-IV) in the treatment of Class II division 1 malocclusion.Methods:Fifty North Indian girls with Class II division 1 malocclusion, in the age range of 9–13 years, were chosen. The subjects were divided among a control group (n  =  10), a twin-block group (n  =  25), and an MPA group (n  =  15). Pre–follow-up and post–follow-up lateral cephalograms of control subjects and pretreatment and posttreatment lateral cephalograms of the treatment subjects were traced manually and subjected to a pitchfork analysis.Results:Neither twin-block nor MPA-IV significantly restricted the forward growth of maxilla. Mandibular growth and improvement in the sagittal skeletal relation were significantly greater in the twin-block subjects. Distal movement of the maxillary dentition and mesial movement of the mandibular dentition were more prominent in the MPA-IV subjects. Molar correction and overjet reductions were significantly greater in the treatment subjects (P < .001).Conclusion:Twin-block and MPA-IV were effective in correcting the molar relationships and reducing the overjet in Class II division 1 malocclusion subjects. However, twin-block contributed more skeletal effects than MPA-IV for the correction of Class II malocclusion.     

Twin Block appliance with acrylic capping does not have a significant inhibitory effect on lower incisor proclination

Objective:To investigate the effect of acrylic capping, treatment duration, overjet, and lower incisor inclination on the posttreatment tooth position in patients treated with 2 Twin Block (TB) appliance versions.Materials and Methods:Cephalograms of 56 patients with Class II malocclusion (21 boys, 35 girls; mean age before treatment [T1] = 12.5 years; standard deviation, 0.7) treated with a TB appliance with either acrylic capping or ball-ended clasps on lower incisors were retrospectively collected and traced. Lower incisor inclination (L1-GoGn, L1-GoMe, L1-MP) was measured at T1 and after TB appliance removal (T2). Regression analysis was performed to evaluate the effect on the lower incisor inclination of appliance type, overjet, lower incisor inclination at T1, and treatment duration after adjusting for baseline measurements.Results:Appliance design was not a significant predictor for either incisor inclination measurement (P< .05). Pretreatment lower incisor inclination was the only factor significantly associated with final tooth inclination (L1-GoGn: β = 0.57, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.30, 0.84, P < .001; L1-GoMe: β = 0.56, 95% CI = 0.28, 0.84, P < .001; L1-MP: β = 0.46, 95% CI = 0.17, 0.75, P = .003). There was weak evidence that treatment duration excluding L1-MP (95% CI = –1.85, –0.02; P = .045) and overjet might be associated with inclination of lower incisors at T2.Conclusions:TB appliance design with acrylic capping on lower incisors appears not to significantly control incisor proclination. Pretreatment lower incisor inclination may be significantly associated with tooth inclination after active TB treatment and should be considered in treatment planning.     

A prospective controlled evaluation of Class II division 1 malocclusions treated with fixed lingual mandibular growth modificator

Objective: To assess the net dentofacial effects of the fixed lingual mandibular growth modificator (FLMGM).Materials and Methods:The study sample comprised 38 patients with Class II/1 malocclusion and retrognathic mandible. All were in the pubertal growth spurt. Whereas FLMGM was applied to the treatment group (n  =  21, mean age  =  13.2 years), no treatment was performed on the control group (n  =  17, mean age  =  12.5 years). Skeletal and dentoalveolar changes were assessed on digital lateral cephalograms obtained at the beginning and end of the treatment/observation period of 8 months. Paired and independent t-tests were used to assess the differences within and between groups.Results:Maxillary growth was not affected by FLMGM treatment, which resulted in a significant overjet reduction of 4.1 mm, an increase in total mandibular length (Co-Gn) of 2.3 mm, chin advancement of 1.6°, and upper incisor retroclination of 4.0°. A reduction of 2.4° in ANB was largely due to an increase of 1.8° in SNB. Favorably, the lower incisors were obviously retroclined by 4.5°. The changes in the vertical skeletal relationships were negligible.Conclusion:FLMGM was effective in treating growing Class II/1 patients and produced favorable dentofacial effects, with the matched untreated sample showing minimal changes. Lower incisor retroclination was a benefit of FLMGM treatment.     

Occlusal plane canting reduction accompanies mandibular counterclockwise rotation in camouflaging treatment of hyperdivergent skeletal Class II malocclusion

ObjectiveTo investigate the occlusal configurations of the hyperdivergent skeletal Class II malocclusion and their alterations during the camouflaging treatment in an attempt to identify occlusal changes that might be related to mandibular counterclockwise rotation.Materials and MethodsCephalograms of 126 subjects with hyperdivergent skeletal Class II malocclusion and 126 subjects with a clinically normal skeletal pattern were chosen. Several measurements were calculated and compared between the groups. To examine the effects of treatment, two groups were established according to mandibular rotation: counterclockwise rotation (CCR) and the opposite clockwise rotation (CR). After 40 subjects were excluded, the other 86 Class II subjects were assigned to CCR (n  =  22) and CR (n  =  64). Their pretreatment (T1), posttreatment (T2), and postretention (T3) cephalograms were obtained. Measurement changes (T3-T1) were analyzed in each group and compared between groups.ResultsCompared with the normal skeletal pattern, the cant of the occlusal plane (OP) of the study subjects was significantly steeper and the vertical heights of the incisors were significantly larger for the malocclusion. Compared with the changes in CR, there was a prominent reduction of the OP canting with remarkable intrusion of the maxillary incisor in CCR.ConclusionIncreased OP canting with overerupted incisors is evident in the hyperdivergent skeletal Class II malocclusion. During the camouflaging treatment, reduction of OP canting could occur. It was accompanied by mandibular counterclockwise rotation and intrusion of the maxillary incisor.     

Current trends in headgear use for the treatment of Class II malocclusions

Objective:To investigate American and Canadian orthodontists’ opinions and perceptions on the use of headgear in the treatment of Class II malocclusions.Materials and Methods:An online survey was sent to randomly chosen orthodontists (n  =  1000).Results:The study was completed by 948 orthodontists; 62% of the orthodontists indicated that they were using headgear in their practice. Those who were not using the appliance (38%) reported that this was mainly due to the availability of better Class II correctors in the market and lack of patient compliance. Of those who use headgear, 24% indicated that the emphasis on headgear use during their residency was an influential aspect of their decision making (P < .05). Nearly a quarter of those who do not use headgear reported that learning about other Class II correctors through continuing education courses was an important factor (P < .05). There was no difference between the headgear users and nonusers in the year and location of practice. Compared with previous studies, this study showed a decline in the use of headgear among orthodontists.Conclusions:Despite a decline, more than half of the orthodontists (62%) believe headgear is a viable treatment. Availability of Class II correctors in the market and familiarity with these appliances though continuing education courses are the reasons for the remaining 38% of orthodontists to abandon use of the headgear.     

Influence of unilateral maxillary first molar extraction treatment on second and third molar inclination in Class II subdivision patients

Objective:To assess the maxillary second molar (M2) and third molar (M3) inclination following orthodontic treatment of Class II subdivision malocclusion with unilateral maxillary first molar (M1) extraction.Materials and Methods:Panoramic radiographs of 21 Class II subdivision adolescents (eight boys, 13 girls; mean age, 12.8 years; standard deviation, 1.7 years) before treatment, after treatment with extraction of one maxillary first molar and Begg appliances and after at least 1.8 years in retention were retrospectively collected from a private practice. M2 and M3 inclination angles (M2/ITP, M2/IOP, M3/ITP, M3/IOP), constructed by intertuberosity (ITP) and interorbital planes (IOP), were calculated for the extracted and nonextracted segments. Random effects regression analysis was performed to evaluate the effect on the molar angulation of extraction, time, and gender after adjusting for baseline measurements.Results:Time and extraction status were significant predictors for M2 angulation. M2/ITP and M2/IOP decreased by 4.04 (95% confidence interval [CI]: −6.93, 1.16; P  =  .001) and 3.67 (95% CI: −6.76, −0.58; P  =  .020) in the extraction group compared to the nonextraction group after adjusting for time and gender. The adjusted analysis showed that extraction was the only predictor for M3 angulation that reached statistical significance. M3 mesial inclination increased by 7.38° (95% CI: −11.2, −3.54; P < .001) and 7.33° (95% CI: −11.48, −3.19; P  =  .001).Conclusions:M2 and M3 uprighting significantly improved in the extraction side after orthodontic treatment with unilateral maxillary M1 extraction. There was a significant increase in mesial tipping of maxillary second molar crowns over time.     

Age-Related Long-Term Posttreatment Occlusal and Arch Changes

Objective:To evaluate differences in long-term postretention changes between adolescents and adults.Materials and Methods:The sample included 96 subjects, 51 adolescents and 45 adults (14.2 ± 0.8 and 21.5 ± 6.8 years of age, respectively, at the end of treatment) retained for 3 years and followed approximately 16 years post treatment, who were randomly selected from two private practices. Prior to treatment, 38 and 58 had Class I and Class II malocclusions, respectively.Results:With the exception of adult midlines, all of the occlusal variables (overjet [0.50–0.77 mm], overbite [0.85–0.95 mm], the maxillary incisor irregularity [0.69–0.80 mm], the mandibular incisor irregularity [0.85–1.50 mm] and the PAR score [0.86–1.92 points]) showed significant increases over time. Adolescents consistently showed greater increases of the occlusal variables than adults, with mandibular incisor irregularity and the PAR index attaining statistically significant (P < .05) levels. Arch length and mandibular intercanine width showed statistically significant decreases over time in both groups; maxillary intercanine and intermolar widths did not change significantly. Overjet increased significantly more in Class II patients than in Class I patients, whereas Class I patients showed significantly greater decreases in mandibular intermolar width than Class II patients.Conclusions:Over the 16-year posttreatment period, adolescents showed significantly greater increases in mandibular incisor irregularity, and the PAR index than adults. Treated Class I patients demonstrated less increase in overjet and greater decreases in mandibular intermolar width than Class II patients.     

Another way of looking at treatment stability

Objective:To determine the contribution of normal physiological changes to the overall manifestation of a relapse after orthodontic treatment. We analyzed long-term changes in the dentition of patients with Class I malocclusions after orthodontic treatment compared with a representative group with untreated Class I malocclusions.Materials and Methods:Study participants (n  =  66; mean age, 12 years at treatment initiation) were treated for Class I malocclusions. Dental changes were evaluated at 2, 5, 10, and 15 years after treatment. Control participants (n  =  79) had untreated Class I malocclusions (n  =  53 evaluated at ages 12 and 22 years; n  =  26 evaluated at ages 19 and 39 years). Dental changes were evaluated with the Peer Assessment Rating (PAR) index.Results:In untreated and treated groups, PAR scores increased over time with gender-specific changes. In the untreated groups, the PAR score significantly increased in male participants between the ages of 12 and 22 years (P  =  .04) and in female participants between the ages of 19 and 39 years (P  =  .001). In the treated group, early posttreatment changes were primarily related to the initial treatment response. Later changes in the PAR score could be attributed to physiological changes, with the same gender-specific changes as those observed in the untreated group.Conclusions:The pattern of physiological changes in dentition for participants between the ages of 12 and 39 was different between sexes. Females showed more relapse than males between 10 and 15 years posttreatment. This distinction should be considered when evaluating long-term orthodontic treatment responses.     

Cranial base characteristics in anteroposterior malocclusions: A meta-analysis

Objective:To investigate cranial base characteristics in malocclusions with sagittal discrepancies.Materials and Methods:An electronic search was performed in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library. A fixed- or random-effect model was applied to calculate weighted mean difference with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) according to statistical heterogeneity. Outcome measures were anterior, posterior, and total cranial base length and cranial base angle. Sensitivity analysis and publication bias were conducted.Results:Twenty studies that together included 1121 Class I, 1051 Class II, and 730 Class III cases qualified for the final analysis. Class III malocclusion demonstrated significantly reduced anterior (95% CI: −1.74, −0.53; P < .001 vs Class I; 95% CI: −3.30, −2.09; P < .001 vs Class II) and total cranial base length (95% CI: −3.33, −1.36; P < .001 vs Class I; 95% CI: −7.38, −4.05; P < .001 vs Class II). Further, Class II patients showed significantly greater anterior and total cranial base length than did Class I patients (95% CI: 0.51, 1.87; P < .001 for SN; 95% CI: 2.20, 3.30; P < .001 for NBa). Cranial base angle was significantly smaller in Class III than in Class I (95% CI: −3.14, −0.93; P < .001 for NSBa; 95% CI: −2.73, −0.68; P  =  .001 for NSAr) and Class II malocclusions (95% CI: −5.73, −1.06; P  =  .004 for NSBa; 95% CI: −6.11, −1.92; P < .001 for NSAr) and greater in Class II than in Class I malocclusions (95% CI: 1.38, 2.38; P < .001 for NSBa).Conclusions:This meta-analysis showed that anterior and total cranial base length and cranial base angle were significantly smaller in Class III malocclusion than in Class I and Class II malocclusions, and that they were greater in Class II subjects compared to controls.     

Class II correction in orthodontic patients utilizing the Mandibular Anterior Repositioning Appliance (MARA)

Objectives:To evaluate skeletal and dentoalveolar changes produced by the Mandibular Anterior Repostioning Appliance (MARA) in the treatment of Class II malocclusion in adolescent patients.Materials and Methods:Lateral cephalograms of 24 patients, mean age 12.40 years, with a Class II malocclusion consecutively treated with MARA were compared with a historical control group. Changes were evaluated using the Pancherz superimposition and grid analysis pre- and posttreatment. Independent sample t-test, Mann-Whitney U-test, and Pearson correlation coefficient analysis were performed.Results:Significant differences were seen between the treatment and control groups during the 12 month period. Improvement in Class II relationship in the MARA group resulted from skeletal and dentoalveolar changes. There was a 7-mm molar correction and a 4.7-mm overjet reduction. There was also an increase in the mandibular base of 3.3 mm with the lower molar and incisor coming forward 2.6 mm and 2.2 mm, respectively. No significant headgear effect was shown on the maxilla. The maxillary incisor position remained unchanged, whereas the molar distalized 1.8 mm. The anterior lower facial height had an overall increase of 2.2 mm.Conclusions:The MARA was successful in achieving a Class I molar relationship and reducing the overjet in Class II malocclusions. This was the result of both skeletal and dentoalveolar changes.     

Dental archforms in dentoalveolar Class I,II and III

Objective:To test the hypothesis that no differences exist in dental arch dimensions between dentoalveolar Classes I, II, and III, and between male and female subjects, as measured on virtual three-dimensional (3D) models.Materials and Methods:Samples included randomly selected plaster dental casts of 137 white patients (43 Class I, 50 Class II, and 44 Class III) from the Department of Orthodontics, School of Dental Medicine, University of Zagreb, Croatia. Dental models were scanned and digitized using ATOS II SO (“Small Objects”) scanning technology (GOM mbH, Braunschweig, Germany). Eight linear and two proportional measurements were calculated for both upper and lower dental arches.Results:In men, a significant difference in the upper dental arch was present in the incisor region, and in the lower dental arch, differences were found in intercanine and intermolar widths (P < .05). Significant differences were noted between male groups in the upper molar depth dimension (P  =  .022) and in the lower molar and canine depth dimensions (P < .05). Class III males had the greatest lower molar and canine width/depth ratios and the smallest lower canine depth/molar depth ratio. Class III women had wider and shorter mandibular arches when compared with Class I and Class II females.Conclusion:The hypothesis was rejected. The dimensions of the dental arches are related to gender and to dentoalveolar class. Class I and II subjects have similar dimensions of maxillary dental arch, but Class II subjects have a transverse deficit in the mandible. In Class III subjects, the maxillary dental arch is insufficient in transverse and sagittal dimensions, and the mandibular arch dominates in the transverse but not in the sagittal dimension.     

A retrospective study of Class II mixed-dentition treatment

Objective:To consider the effectiveness of early treatment using one mixed-dentition approach to the correction of moderate and severe Class II malocclusions.Materials and Methods:Three groups of Class II subjects were included in this retrospective study: an early treatment (EarlyTx) group that first presented at age 7 to 9.5 years (n = 54), a late treatment (LateTx) group whose first orthodontic visit occurred between ages 12 and 15 (n = 58), and an untreated Class II (UnTx) group to assess the pretreatment comparability of the two treated groups (n = 51). Thirteen conventional cephalometric measurements were reported for each group and Class II molar severity was measured on the study casts of the EarlyTx and LateTx groups.Results:Successful Class II correction was observed in approximately three quarters of both the EarlyTx group and the LateTx group at the end of treatment. EarlyTx patients had fewer permanent teeth extracted than did the LateTx patients (5.6% vs 37.9%, P < .001) and spent less time in full-bonded appliance therapy in the permanent dentition than did LateTx patients (1.7 ± 0.8 vs 2.6 ± 0.7years, P < .001). When supervision time is included, the EarlyTx group had longer total treatment time and averaged more visits than did the LateTx group (53.1 ± 18. 8 vs 33.7 ± 8.3, P < .0001). Fifty-five percent of the LateTx extraction cases involved removal of the maxillary first premolars only and were finished in a Class II molar relationship.Conclusion:EarlyTx comprehensive mixed-dentition treatment was an effective modality for early correction of Class II malocclusions.     

Maxillary incisor inclination of skeletal Class III patients treated with extraction of the upper first premolars and two-jaw surgery: Conventional orthognathic surgery vs surgery-first approach

Objective:To investigate the differences in the amount and pattern of the maxillary incisor (MXI) inclination change in skeletal Class III patients treated with extraction of the maxillary first premolars (MXP1) and two-jaw surgery (TJS) between conventional orthognathic surgery (COS) and surgery-first approach (SFA).Materials and Methods:The study included 60 skeletal Class III patients who had normal maxillary position, prognathic mandible, and mild crowding in the maxillary arch (≤4 mm). The patients were divided into group 1 (COS, n  =  36) and group 2 (SFA, n  =  24). Lateral cephalograms were taken before treatment (T0), 1 month before surgery (T1), within 1 month after surgery (T2), and after debonding (T3) for COS patients and at T0, T2, and T3 for SFA patients. After measurement of the skeletodental variables, statistical analyses were performed.Results:During T0–T2, the amount of MXI inclination change (ΔU1-SN) in group 1 was significantly larger than that in group 2 (−12.8° vs −4.4°; P < .001). During T2–T3, ΔU1-SN in groups 1 and 2 occurred in opposite directions (3.8° vs −5.9°; P < .001). However, the total amount of ΔU1-SN during T0–T3 was not different between groups 1 and 2 (−9.0° vs −10.3°). At T3 the U1-SN values for groups 1 and 2, respectively, moved closer to normal according to the values of the normal range rate (all 83%), relative percentage ratio (102.4% and 100.1%), and achievement ratio (77.7% and 97.8%).Conclusions:The results of this study might provide basic data for predicting the amount and pattern of MXI inclination change in SFA for skeletal Class III TJS patients.     

Response of the maxillary dentition to a statically determinate one-couple system with tip-back mechanics: A prospective clinical trial

Objective:To quantify the effects of tip-back mechanics on the maxillary first molars and incisors.Materials and Methods:Sixteen subjects with Class II end-on malocclusion were treated with an intrusion arch to achieve distalization of the maxillary molar through tip-back mechanics. Lateral cephalograms were taken prior to molar tip-back (T1), after molar tip-back (T2), and after molar root uprighting (T3). Data were analyzed using the Friedman’s and Wilcoxon signed rank tests to evaluate differences in time points (P ≤ .016).Results:The maxillary first molar distalized 1.53 mm (P = .001) with 6.65° (P = .001) of distal tipping and 0.86 mm (P = .001) of extrusion at T2. Minor relapse of the first molar (mesial direction) was seen at T3. The maxillary incisors flared labially 0.4 mm, and the incisor root apex moved palatally 1.19 mm (P = .005) at T2. At T3, the incisor root apex moved palatally 1.5 mm (P = .003) from T1. An angular change from T1 of 3.31° (P = .008) and 3.53° (P = .014) was seen at T2 and T3, respectively, as a result of palatal root movement of the maxillary incisors.Conclusions:A significant amount of distalization of maxillary molars was attained at the crown level with tip-back mechanics. Palatal root angulation change was significant in the incisors with minimal anteroposterior movement of the incisal edge.     

Long-term evaluation of Class II subdivision treatment with unilateral maxillary first molar extraction

Objective:To evaluate the long-term effects of asymmetrical maxillary first molar (M1) extraction in Class II subdivision treatment.Materials and Methods:Records of 20 Class II subdivision whites (7 boys, 13 girls; mean age, 13.0 years; SD, 1.7 years) consecutively treated with the Begg technique and M1 extraction, and 15 untreated asymmetrical Class II adolescents (4 boys, 11 girls; mean age, 12.2 years; SD, 1.3 years) were examined in this study. Cephalometric analysis and PAR assessment were carried out before treatment (T1), after treatment (T2), and on average 2.5 years posttreatment (T3) for the treatment group, and at similar time points and average follow-up of 1.8 years for the controls.Results:The adjusted analysis indicated that the maxillary incisors were 2.3 mm more retracted in relation to A-Pog between T1 and T3 (β  =  2.31; 95% CI; 0.76, 3.87), whereas the mandibular incisors were 1.3 mm more protracted (β  =  1.34; 95% CI; 0.09, 2.59), and 5.9° more proclined to the mandibular plane (β  =  5.92; 95% CI; 1.43, 10.41) compared with controls. The lower lip appeared 1.4 mm more protrusive relative to the subnasale-soft tissue-Pog line throughout the observation period in the treated adolescents (β  =  1.43; 95% CI; 0.18, 2.67). There was a significant PAR score reduction over the entire follow-up period in the molar extraction group (β  =  −6.73; 95% CI; −10.7, −2.7). At T2, 65% of the subjects had maxillary midlines perfectly aligned with the face.Conclusions:Unilateral M1 extraction in asymmetrical Class II cases may lead to favorable occlusal outcomes in the long term without harming the midline esthetics and soft tissue profile.     

Dentoskeletal effects produced by a Jasper Jumper with an anterior bite plane

Objective:The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate the dentoskeletal effects produced by a modified Jasper Jumper with an anterior bite plane for the correction of Class II division 1 malocclusion.Materials and Methods:A sample of 32 growing patients (mean age  =  11.9 ± 1.4 years) with Class II division 1 malocclusion and increased overbite were treated with a modified Jasper Jumper (JJ) and anterior bite plane protocol and compared with a matched control group of 30 subjects with untreated Class II malocclusion (mean age 12.2 ± 0.8 years). Lateral cephalograms were taken before treatment (T1) and at the end of comprehensive treatment (T2). Mean treatment duration was 2.1 ± 0.4 years. The T1–T2 changes in the two groups were compared with Student’s t-tests for independent samples.Results:The JJ group was successfully treated to a Class I occlusal relationship with a significant reduction in overjet (–3.9 mm, P < .001) and overbite (–3.1 mm, P < .001). The JJ group exhibited a significant increase in mandibular length and a significant improvement in maxillomandibular sagittal skeletal relationships. The lower incisors were significantly proclined, while the lower first molars demonstrated significant movement in a mesial direction.Conclusions:Use of a modified JJ appliance and anterior bite plane is an effective protocol for the treatment of Class II malocclusion with increased overbite and greater skeletal (75%) than dentoalveolar (25%) effects mainly at the mandibular level.     

Changes of anterior maxillary alveolar bone thickness following incisor proclination and extrusion

Objective:To investigate changes in maxillary alveolar bone thickness after maxillary incisor proclination and extrusion during anterior crossbite correction in a group of growing patients with Class III malocclusion.Materials and Methods:Maxillary incisors of 15 growing patients with anterior crossbite were proclined and extruded with 0.016″ beta-titanium advancing loops and Class III elastics. Lateral cephalograms were recorded before advancement (T₀) and 4 months after a normal overjet and overbite were achieved (T₁). Changes in alveolar bone thickness surrounding the maxillary incisors at the crestal (S1), midroot (S2), and apical (S3) levels were measured using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). Paired t-tests were used to determine the significance of the changes. A Spearman rank correlation analysis was performed to explore the relationship between thickness changes and the rate and amount of incisor movements.Results:Although statistically significant decreases were observed in palatal and total bone thickness at the S2 and S3 level (P < .05), the amounts of these changes were clinically insignificant, ranging from 0.34 to 0.59 mm. Changes in labial bone thickness at all levels were not significant. Changes in palatal bone thickness at S3 were negatively correlated with changes in incisor inclination. (r  =  −0.71; P < .05).Conclusion:In a group of growing patients with Class III malocclusion undergoing anterior crossbite correction, controlled tipping mechanics accompanied by extrusive force may produce successful tooth movement with minimal iatrogenic detriment to the alveolar bone.     

Comparison of double-plate appliance/facemask combination and facemask therapy in treating Class III malocclusions

Objective:To compare the treatment effects of double-plate appliance/facemask (DPA-FM) combined therapy and facemask (FM) therapy in treating Class III malocclusions.Materials and Methods:The material consisted of lateral cephalometric radiographs of 45 children with skeletal and dental Class III malocclusion. The first treatment group comprised 15 patients (mean age  =  11 years) treated with FM. The second treatment group comprised 15 patients (mean age  = 10 years 9 months) treated with DPA-FM. The third group comprised 15 patients (mean age  =  10 years 5 months) used as controls. The paired t-test was used to evaluate the treatment effects and changes during the treatment and observation period in each group. Differences between the groups were determined by variance analysis and the Duncan test.Results:With the DPA-FM and FM appliances, the SNA and ANB angles increased significantly. These changes were statistically different compared with the control group. Lower facial height showed a greater increase in both treatment groups than in the control group. Molar relation showed a greater increase in the DPA-FM group than in the FM group. The increase in U6/ANS-PNS angle in the FM group was significantly different from the DPA-FM and control groups. The L1/NB angle and Pg-T increased significantly only in the FM group, but no significant difference was found between the treatment groups.Conclusions:In the treatment of Class III malocclusion, both appliances were effective. The significant sagittal changes in the lower incisors and pogonion in the FM group compared with the nonsignificant changes in the DPA-FM group might be due to the restriction effect of acrylic blocks in the DPA-FM group.