scholarly journals Is Herbst-Multibracket Appliance Treatment More Efficient in Adolescents than in Adults?

2009 ◽  
Vol 79 (1) ◽  
pp. 173-177 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julia von Bremen ◽  
Niko Bock ◽  
Sabine Ruf
Keyword(s):  
Skeletal Maturity ◽  
Peer Assessment ◽  
Class Ii ◽  
Substantial Improvement ◽  
Adult Group ◽  
Adolescent Group ◽  
Division 1 ◽  
The University ◽  
Multibracket Appliance ◽  
Class Ii Division 1

Abstract Objective: To determine whether Herbst treatment is more efficient in adolescent than in adult Class II division 1 subjects. Materials and Methods: All Class II division 1 patients with a full secondary dentition who had been treated at the orthodontic department of the University of Giessen with a Herbst appliance between 1990 and 2000 were considered. The complete records of 77 patients were available. According to their skeletal maturity, as assessed on hand-wrist radiographs, the subjects were divided into an adolescent group (MP3-F to MP3-H; n = 49; mean age 13.5 years) and an adult group (R-IJ to R-J; n = 28; mean age 20.7 years). Pretreatment and posttreatment dental casts were evaluated using the Peer Assessment Rating (PAR) Index. The reductions in PAR scores of the two groups were compared. Results: Before treatment, both groups had a severe Class II division 1 malocclusion. The average PAR score of the adolescent patients was slightly lower (27.8) than that of the adult patients (28.8). After treatment, good results were reached for both groups, and the average PAR scores of the two groups were comparable (adolescents: 4.5; adults: 4.8). The average reductions in PAR score were 82.7% (23.3 points) for the adolescent group and 82.9% (24.0 points) for the adults, indicating great improvement in both groups. Conclusions: Because good treatment results were achieved, with substantial improvement of the pretreatment situation in both groups, Herbst treatment can be considered equally efficient in adolescent and in adult Class II division 1 subjects.

Outcome quality of Class II division 1 Herbst-multibracket appliance treatment: influence of pretreatment Class II severity and skeletal maturity

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Niko C Bock ◽  
Julia Jost ◽  
Sabine Ruf
Keyword(s):  
Skeletal Maturity ◽  
Peer Assessment ◽  
Total Sample ◽  
Class Ii ◽  
Outcome Quality ◽  
Division 1 ◽  
Total Observation ◽  
Multibracket Appliance

Summary Background No reliable predictive factors for treatment (Tx) success and outcome quality in Class II:1 Tx have been identified yet. Objective To assess the influence of pre-Tx Class II severity and skeletal maturity on outcome quality after Herbst-multibracket appliance (MBA) Tx. Subjects and methods All Class II:1 patients who completed Herbst-MBA Tx between 1986 and 2014 at University of Giessen, Germany. Pre-Tx (T0), post-Tx (T1), and (if available) post-retention (≥24 months; T2) study casts were evaluated using the Peer Assessment Rating (PAR) index and the Ahlgren scale. Three occlusal severity (mild, moderate, and severe) and four skeletal maturity (pre-peak, peak, post-peak, and adult) subgroup categories were defined. Results Four hundred eight-five patients (age at T0: 14.4 ± 3.2 years) could be evaluated; post-retention (T3) data were available for 230 patients. For the total sample, the median PAR score was 32.4 ± 8.85 at T0, 8.0 ± 4.52 at T1, and 8.8 ± 5.11 at T2. Very low correlations between the subgroup categories (occlusal severity/skeletal maturity) and PAR-score reduction were detected both during Tx (r = 0.12/r = 0.05) and the total observation period (r = 0.17/r = 0.03). The overall outcome quality according to Ahlgren was: 17.0% excellent, 34.8% good, 43.8% acceptable, 2.2% unacceptable, and 2.2% not assessable. The association with the subgroup categories was: p = 0.019 (occlusal severity)/p = 0.820 (skeletal maturity). Limitations Retrospective study design with follow-up data was not available from all subjects and no data from untreated controls. Tx was performed by several physicians using different kind of MBAs. Conclusion Class II:1 Herbst-MBA Tx is an effective and successful Tx approach irrespective of pre-Tx skeletal maturity but dependent—to a certain extent—on Class II severity. Thus, when considering a Herbst appliance for Class II correction, neither of the two variables should considerably limit the indication.

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

2017 ◽  
Vol 2017 ◽  
pp. 1-9 ◽  
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.

Perbedaan Analisis Sefalometri Skeletal Sebelum dan Sesudah Perawatan Alat Myofunctional pada Pasien Maloklusi Dentoskeletal Kelas II Divisi I dalam Masa Pertumbuhan dengan Metode Steiner

2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Nugroho Ahmad Riyadi
Keyword(s):  
Orthodontic Treatment ◽  
Class Ii ◽  
T Test ◽  
Analytic Study ◽  
Statistic Analysis ◽  
Twin Block ◽  
Normal Occlusion ◽  
Division 1 ◽  
Before And After ◽  
Class Ii Division 1

The aim of orthodontics treatment is normalization of teeth position in three planes, using various orthodontics appliance to reach the chepalometric standar and normal occlusion. Orthodontic treatment for dentoskeletal class II division 1 malocclusion in growing patients using myofunctional appliance may correct anteroposterior planes of mandibula. This study was a descriptive retrospective analytic study to look at the success of Orthodontic treatment for dentoskeletal class II division 1 in growing patients with myofunctional appliance using chepalometrics analysis Steiner value. The sample used in this study is chepalogram radiographic from patient with dentoskeletal class II division 1 malocclusion in growing patients before and after using myofunctional appliance in PPDGS orthodontics Clinic of Padjadjaran University. Statistic analysis were performed with pair t-test and Wilcoxon. Based on this study, it is concluded that orthodontic treatment with myofunctional appliance such as activator and twin block in growing patient with dentoskeletal class II division 1 malocclusion shows significant changes and compatibility with the normal criteria.

Treatment of Class II Division 1 with Impacted Mandibular Right Second Molar Using Microimplant

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 238-248
Author(s):  
Sun-mi Lee ◽  
Seong-Ryeol Bae ◽  
Hee-Moon Kyung ◽  
Mi-hee Hong ◽  
Hyo-Sang Park
Keyword(s):  
Class Ii ◽  
Second Molar ◽  
Division 1 ◽  
Class Ii Division 1

Comparative Dentoskeletal Study of Class II Division 1 and Class II Division 2 Malocclusion Subjects

2011 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 36-41
Author(s):  
Jyoti Dhakal
Keyword(s):  
Class Ii ◽  
Class Ii Malocclusion ◽  
Basic Difference ◽  
Cephalometric Radiograph ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Division 1 ◽  
Dentoskeletal Morphology ◽  
Division 2 ◽  
Dental Cast ◽  
Class Ii Division 1

The dentoskeletal characteristics of Class II malocclusion subjects were evaluated using cephalometric radiograph and dental cast of 60 untreated patients. The sample included 30 Class II Division 1 and 30 Class II Division 2 malocclusion patients. The inter-canine, inter-premolar, inter-molar, inter-canine alveolar, inter-premolar alveolar, inter-molar alveolar widths are measured on study models. The result showed statistically significant difference between the groups for mandibular inter-canine width only. The cephalometric analysis revealed that SNB angle was responsible for the skeletal sagittal difference between the two groups except for the position of maxillary incisors. No basic difference in dentoskeletal morphology existed between Class II Division 1 and Class II Division 2 malocclusions.

scholarly journals Comparative Evaluation of Adenoids, Upper Airway, and Tongue Using “Predictors of Difficult Airways” in Class II Division 1 and Division 2 Cases with Class I Cases: Prospective In Vivo Observational Study

2021 ◽  
pp. 030157422096341
Author(s):  
Smita Mangesh Choudhari ◽  
Sunita Shrivastav
Keyword(s):  
Significant Positive Correlation ◽  
Upper Airway ◽  
Class Ii ◽  
Class I ◽  
Positive Correlation ◽  
Division 1 ◽  
Difficult Airways ◽  
Mandibular Protrusion ◽  
Division 2 ◽  
Class Ii Division 1

Introduction: Altered nasorespiratory function leads to altered craniofacial growth. Thus, airway evaluation is important for preventive, interceptive, and corrective orthodontic treatment. The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare adenoids, the upper airway, the tongue, and mandibular dimensions using “predictors of difficult airways” in class II division 1 and class II division 2 cases with class I cases. Method: Sixty subjects of age 15 to 18 years were divided into 3 groups (group 1: class I cases; group 2: class II division 1 cases; and group 3: class II division 2 cases) based on cephalometric parameters, with 20 cases in each group. Cephalometric evaluation of adenoids and the nasopharyngeal airway was done using the Handelman–Osborne area method. Upper and lower airway evaluation was done using McNamara’s linear method. “Predictors of difficult airways” were used for evaluation of the airway, which included nasal competency, the Mallampati scale, mandibular length, mandibular protrusion, and the thyromental distance. Results: The present study found a significant positive correlation between the grades of nasal competency and percentage adenoid wall area, and a significant negative correlation between the grades of nasal competency and the upper airway. There was a significant positive correlation between the grades of nasal competency and mandibular length, and a significant positive correlation between the grades of mandibular protrusion and mandibular length. There was a significant positive correlation between the grades of the thyromental distance and mandibular length. Conclusion: It was concluded that the “predictors of difficult airways” would be helpful in early diagnosis and identification of potential risk factors that may cause “breathing disorders”–related malocclusions and later on increase the risk of developing OSA.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document