Orthodontic treatment for deep bite and retroclined upper front teeth in children

Orthodontic treatment for deep bite and retroclined upper front teeth in children

BACKGROUND

A Class II division 2 malocclusion is characterised by upper front teeth that are retroclined (tilted toward the roof of the mouth) and an increased overbite (deep overbite), which can cause oral problems and may affect appearance.This problem can be corrected by the use of special dental braces (functional appliances) that move the upper front teeth forward and change the growth of the upper or lower jaws, or both. Most types of functional appliances are removable and this treatment approach does not usually require extraction of any permanent teeth. Additional treatment with fixed braces may be necessary to ensure the best result.An alternative approach is to provide space for the correction of the front teeth by moving the molar teeth backwards. This is done by applying a force to the teeth from the back of the head using a head brace (headgear) and transmitting this force to part of a fixed or removable dental brace that is attached to the back teeth. The treatment may be carried out with or without extraction of permanent teeth.If headgear use is not feasible, the back teeth may be held in place by bands connected to a fixed bar placed across the roof of the mouth or in contact with the front of the roof of the mouth. This treatment usually requires two permanent teeth to be taken out from the middle of the upper arch (one on each side).

OBJECTIVES

To establish whether orthodontic treatment that does not involve extraction of permanent teeth produces a result that is any different from no orthodontic treatment or orthodontic treatment involving extraction of permanent teeth, in children with a Class II division 2 malocclusion.

SEARCH METHODS

Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist searched the following electronic databases: Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register (to 13 November 2017), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library, 2017, Issue 10), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 13 November 2017), and Embase Ovid (1980 to 13 November 2017). To identify any unpublished or ongoing trials, the US National Institutes of Health Ongoing Trials Register (ClinicalTrials.gov) and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (apps.who.int/trialsearch) were searched. We also contacted international researchers who were likely to be involved in any Class II division 2 clinical trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs) of orthodontic treatments to correct deep bite and retroclined upper front teeth in children.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened the search results to find eligible studies, and would have extracted data and assessed the risk of bias from any included trials. We had planned to use random-effects meta-analysis; to express effect estimates as mean differences for continuous outcomes and risk ratios for dichotomous outcomes, with 95% confidence intervals; and to investigate any clinical or methodological heterogeneity.

MAIN RESULTS

We did not identify any RCTs or CCTs that assessed the treatment of Class II division 2 malocclusion in children.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is no evidence from clinical trials to recommend or discourage any type of orthodontic treatment to correct Class II division 2 malocclusion in children. This situation seems unlikely to change as trials to evaluate the best management of Class II division 2 malocclusion are challenging to design and conduct due to low prevalence, difficulties with recruitment and ethical issues with randomisation.

Dentoskeletal modifications in Class II deep bite malocclusion treatment with anterior bite plane functional appliance

Background

A treatment modality for Class II division 1 malocclusion is discussed. Orthodontic treatment of patients with deep bite and Class II malocclusion is an important challenge in clinical practice. The aim of this work is to compare the efficacy of anterior bite plane functional appliance (ABPFA) by assessing the changes in different times with untreated patients by literature.

Material and Methods

The study group comprised 22 subjects with Class II division 1 malocclusion and hypo-divergent. Eligibility criteria for this study were: dental Class II division 1 malocclusion, hypo-divergent skeletal pattern, late mixed or permanent dentition. We analyzed with the use of stable bone structure (ASCB) at two different times: pre-treatment (T0) and post-treatment (T1) after 24 months. Inter-group differences were evaluated with paired samples t-test at the P<0.05 level.

Results

No statistical significant differences were found in cephalometric skeletal measurements, whereas dental parameters showed a significant different overjet, which was significantly reduced (6 mm at T0 vs. 5 mm at T1) in our series.

Conclusions

In ABPFA group, the treatment effects were reduce mainly Class II malocclusion, overjet and overbite alteration. This appliance seems to suggest a significant beneficial effect in mandible displacement by reducing the counter clockwise rotation of the mandible, which is further confirmed by the almost absence of modifications of ArGoMe and SNGoMe angles. The ABPFA is particularly suitable to reduce the non-desirable dental effects represented by lower incisors pro inclination, and upper incisors retro-inclination.

Key words:Orthodontics, Functional orthodontics, Class II malocclusion, Anterior bite plane functional appliance.

Methodological quality and implications for practice of systematic Cochrane reviews in pediatric oral health: a critical assessment

BACKGROUND

To ensure evidence-based decision-making in pediatric oral health, Cochrane systematic reviews that address topics pertinent to this field are necessary. We aimed to identify all systematic reviews of paediatric dentistry and oral health by the Cochrane Oral Health Group (COHG), summarize their characteristics and assess their methodological quality. Our second objective was to assess implications for practice in the review conclusions and provide an overview of clinical implications about the usefulness of paediatric oral health interventions in practice.

METHODS

We conducted a methodological survey including all paediatric dentistry reviews from the COHG. We extracted data on characteristics of included reviews, then assessed the methodological quality using a validated 11-item quality assessment tool (AMSTAR). Finally, we coded each review to indicate whether its authors concluded that an intervention should be implemented in practice, was not supported or was refuted by the evidence, or should be used only in research (inconclusive evidence).

RESULTS

We selected 37 reviews; most concerned the prevention of caries. The methodological quality was high, except for the assessment of reporting bias. In 7 reviews (19%), the research showed that benefits outweighed harms; in 1, the experimental intervention was found ineffective; and in 29 (78%), evidence was insufficient to assess benefits and harms. In the 7 reviews, topical fluoride treatments (with toothpaste, gel or varnish) were found effective for permanent and deciduous teeth in children and adolescents, and sealants for occlusal tooth surfaces of permanent molars.

CONCLUSIONS

Cochrane reviews of paediatric dentistry were of high quality. They provided strong evidence that topical fluoride treatments and sealants are effective for children and adolescents and thus should be implemented in practice. However, a substantial number of reviews yielded inconclusive evidence.

Stability of deep-bite correction: A systematic review

OBJECTIVES

Deep bite occurs in about 15% to 20% of the US population. Currently, it is unknown which types of correction are most efficient or stable. The purpose of this systematic review was to investigate factors related to stability of deep-bite correction.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An electronic search of 4 databases was performed from January 1, 1966 to June 27, 2012. Studies were considered for inclusion if they reported on deep bite samples that underwent orthodontic treatment in the permanent dentition. Records were required at the initial, posttreatment, and 1-year posttreatment times. Hand searching of reference lists of the included studies was performed. Data were abstracted using custom forms, and risk of bias was assessed using a modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.

RESULTS

Twenty-six studies met the inclusion criteria. Most were case series, with considerable potential for bias. The significant heterogeneity of the studies precluded meta-analyses, and only descriptive statistics and stratified comparisons were reported. On average, patients underwent significant overbite improvement during treatment, and most of the correction was maintained long-term. Across all studies, the mean initial overbite, posttreatment overbite, and long-term overbite were 5.3, 2.6, and 3.4 mm, respectively. Initial severity appeared to be related to long-term stability. However, this relationship was difficult to isolate from other factors. The length of follow-up did not appear to be related to the amount of relapse.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the quality of the current evidence is not high, patients with deep-bite malocclusion appear to undergo relatively successful treatment, and most of the correction appears to be stable.

Cochrane systematic reviews in orthodontics

INTRODUCTION

The Cochrane Collaboration is an international scientific not-for-profit organization the purpose of which is to produce and distribute systematic reviews of randomized clinical trials. The aim of this paper is to list the different existing Cochrane systematic reviews in the field of dentofacial orthopedics (DFO) and to analyse their main features.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The choice of Cochrane systematic reviews based on dentofacial orthopedics was made from the exhaustive list published by the Cochrane Oral Health Group.

RESULTS

A total of 12 systematic Cochrane reviews related to dentofacial orthopedics were listed. All concluded on the need to conduct randomized clinical trials using more appropriate methodologies and comprising larger samples. None of these systematic reviews offered clear proof supporting any one form of treatment or treatment modality.

DISCUSSION

Despite the lack of relevant conclusions in the still meagre number of Cochrane systematic reviews related to DFO, it is essential for orthodontists to regularly consult the reviews in the framework of their daily evidence-based orthodontic practice. This is true too for orthodontic researchers as clinical DFO research needs to be extended with the setting up of methodologically unquestionable randomized clinical trials. However, there exist alternatives to randomized clinical trials offering a lower level of proof but which are better suited to the field of dentofacial orthopedics.

Early treatment of a Class II, division 2 malocclusion with the Trainer for Kids (T4K): a case report

This paper reports a Class II, division 2 malocclusion case successfully treated at an early age and in a relatively short period of time using the Trainer for Kids (T4K), a prefabricated functional appliance. Skeletal changes observed in the before and after treatment cephalic radiographs were compared with the expected changes produced by the patient's natural growth. The functional appliance's effects resulting in the outcomes observed in this clinical case, as well as the importance of identifying the etiological factors when treating a malocclusion will be discussed.