« Prev |
2021 Apr-Jun; Vol 12, No 2:e4 |
Next » |
e4 |
Does Appliance Design Affect Treatment Outcomes of Class II Division 1 Malocclusion? A Two-Center Retrospective Study J Oral Maxillofac Res 2021;12(2):e4 doi:10.5037/jomr.2021.12204 Abstract | HTML | PDF | XML |
Does Appliance Design Affect Treatment Outcomes of Class II Division 1 Malocclusion? A Two-Center Retrospective Study
1Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Izmir Katip Celebi University, Izmir, Turkey.
2Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Kırıkkale University, Kırıkkale, Turkey.
Corresponding Author:
Cemil Meriç Street, 35640, İzmir
Turkey
Phone: +90 (232) 325 40 40
Fax: +90 (232) 325 25 35
E-mail: burcin.yksel@gmail.com
ABSTRACT
Objectives: The purpose of this retrospective study was to compare the pre- and post-treatment values of patients treated with monoblock and twin-block appliances with the values of the skeletal Class I individuals.
Material and Methods: The initial lateral cephalometric radiographs of the pubertal untreated skeletal class I patients and cephalometric radiographs of 60 (30 monoblock, 30 twin-block) patients before and after the functional treatment were included in the study. Skeletal, dental, and soft tissue measurements were performed by a single researcher using Dolphin Imaging software version 11.95 (Dolphin Imaging, Chatsworth, CA, USA). Paired t-test was used for statistical evaluation and P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.
Results: In both monoblock and twin-block groups, there was a statistically significant increase in the measurements of the lower jaw and the vertical direction values (sella nasion B point (SNB), pogonion nasion perpendicular, Y-axis, sella nasion-gonion gnathion, palatal-mandibular angle, anterior facial height, mandibular length P < 0.05); however, in the Twin-block group, the lower jaw was found to be displaced more forward (change for twin-block; SNB = 2.35, Wits appraisal = -4.77). The most measurements of the twin-block treated group were similar to the control group.
Conclusions: Both functional appliances have been identified to be useful in achieving treatment targets; however, with twin-block, results closer to ideal values are obtained.
J Oral Maxillofac Res 2021;12(2):e4
doi: 10.5037/jomr.2021.12204
Accepted for publication: 12 May 2021
Keywords: growth and development; mandible; orthodontics; retrognathia; treatment outcome.
To cite this article: Does Appliance Design Affect Treatment Outcomes of Class II Division 1 Malocclusion? A Two-Center Retrospective Study J Oral Maxillofac Res 2021;12(2):e4 URL: http://www.ejomr.org/JOMR/archives/2021/2/e4/v12n2e4ht.htm |
Received: 3 March 2021 | Accepted: 12 May 2021 | Published: 30 June 2021
Copyright: © The Author(s). Published by JOMR under CC BY-NC-ND 3.0 licence, 2021.