Treatment stability after total maxillary arch distalization with modified C-palatal plates in adults

The effectiveness of the total-maxillary-arch-distalization approach in treating class II division 1 malocclusion: A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this review is to assess the effect of total maxillary arch distalization (TMAD) treatment on the dental, skeletal, soft tissues, and airways during non-extraction camouflage treatment of class II division 1 patients.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of the published data in four electronic databases up to April 2023. We considered studies for inclusion if they were examining the effects of TMAD during treatment of class II division 1 malocclusion in the permanent dentition. Study selection, data extraction, risk of bias assessment, and assessment of the strength of the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) tool were performed in duplicate.

RESULTS

Out of the 27 articles that met the initial eligibility criteria, 19 studies were finally selected. Fair to relatively good quality evidence was identified after the risk of bias assessment of the included studies. Out of the 19 selected studies, 5 studies used inter-radicular TADs, 10 studies used modified C- palatal plate (MCPP), 3 studies used infra zygomatic crest (IZC) TADs, 1 study compared buccal TADs versus MCPP, and 1 study compared between cervical headgear and MCPP. The maximum amount of maxillary arch distalization using buccal TADs, MCPP, IZC TADs, and headgear was 4.2mm, 5.4mm, 5mm, and 2.5mm respectively. Different results regarding the amount of dental, skeletal, and soft tissue changes were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

The current low to very low certainty level of evidence suggests that TMAD is effective in camouflaging class II division 1 malocclusion. Future well-conducted and clearly reported randomized controlled trials that include a control group are needed to make robust recommendations regarding the effect of TMAD with different appliances on dental, skeletal, and soft tissue structures.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

TMAD should be given priority with caution in class II patients who refuse the extraction of premolars. TMAD may be considered an adjunctive approach to solve cases associated with high anchorage need or anchorage loss.

Nonextraction anterior open bite treatment with distalization and intrusion

This case report describes successful orthodontic retreatment for vertical control with nonextraction orthodontic therapy. A 31-year-old woman complained of anterior open bite and crowding. She had slightly protrusive lips but wanted to correct her malocclusion without extraction. Two palatal temporary skeletal anchorage devices were used for the distalization of the maxillary arch along with posterior intrusion. Mandibular distalization was performed with Class III elastics. The duration of active treatment was 22 months. The plain and efficient mechanics used contributed to the effective distalization of both arches, the intrusion of the maxillary posterior teeth, and favorable profile changes. The results were still stable at the five-year follow-up period.

Effectiveness of miniscrew-supported maxillary molar distalization according to temporary anchorage device features and appliance design: systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness of distalizing maxillary first molars (U6) by temporary anchorage devices (TADs) according to their location (palatal, buccal, and zygomatic), their number, and appliance design.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An electronic search of maxillary molar distalization with TADs was done through April 2023. After study selection, data extraction, and risk-of-bias assessment, meta-analyses were performed for the extent of distalization, distal tipping, and vertical movement of U6 using the generic inverse variance and random-effects model. The significance level was set at 0.05.

RESULTS

Forty studies met the inclusion criteria: 4 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), 13 prospective studies, and 23 retrospective studies (total of 1182 patients). Distalization of the U6 was not significantly greater (P = .64) by palatal (3.74 mm) and zygomatic (3.68 mm) than by buccal (3.23 mm) TADs. Distal tipping was significantly higher (P < .001) in nonrigid (9.84°) than in rigid (1.97°) appliances. Vertical movement was mostly intrusive and higher but not significantly different (P = .28) in zygomatic anchorage (-1.16 mm).

CONCLUSIONS

Distalization of U6 with TADs can be an effective and stable treatment procedure, especially when performed with rigid palatal appliances. However, further RCTs or prospective cohort studies are strongly recommended to provide more clinical evidence.

Skeletal and dentoalveolar changes after total maxillary arch distalization using the casted palatal plate vs. buccal miniscrews: A randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate treatment changes after total maxillary arch distalization using the casted palatal plate compared with buccal miniscrews.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This was a randomized, parallel, two-arm, single center trial. Participants were young adults with class II dental relationships and normal or horizontal growth patterns. The patients were treated with total distalization of the maxillary arch and were randomly allocated, according to the anchorage devices, between the plate group and the minivis group. The primary outcomes were sagittal, vertical and angular changes of molars and incisors, while the secondary outcomes were skeletal and soft tissue changes. Outcomes were evaluated on lateral cephalograms and blinding of outcome assessment was implemented. A multivariate analysis of Variance (MANOVA) tests were used and Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons with P<0.001.

RESULTS

Forty patients (33 females and 7 males; mean age 20±3.1 years) where enrolled. A significant distalization of U6 was observed in both groups (4.33mm in the plate group and 1.88mm in the miniscrews group). It was combined with significant intrusion and non-significant distal tipping of the U6 in the plate group (1.85mm and 3.10°, respectively), while intrusion and distal tipping were non-significant in the miniscrew group (0.8mm and 2°, respectively). Both groups showed significant retraction and palatal inclination without vertical changes of U1. Only the plate group produced significant reduction of ANB and Wits. Upper and lower lips were retracted and the nasolabial angle increased significantly in both groups. There was no significant main effect of the appliance type on the comparison of treatment effects between the two groups (P=0.623). However, univariate comparisons showed that the plaque group showed greater distalization of the U6 (P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Both the casted palatal plate and buccal miniscrews can be viable devices for total distalization of the maxillary arch in the treatment of class II patients. The casted plate may be considered when more extensive distalization is required.

Treatment effects after maxillary total arch distalization using a modified C-palatal plate in patients with Class II malocclusion with sinus pneumatization

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the treatment effects after molar distalization using modified C-palatal plates in patients with Class II malocclusion with maxillary sinus pneumatization.

METHODS

This study consisted of 70 lateral cephalograms derived from cone-beam computerized tomography images of 35 patients with Class II malocclusion (mean age 22.3 ± 7.4 years) who had undergone bilateral total arch distalization of the maxillary dentition using modified C-palatal plates. The samples were divided into 2 groups according to sinus pneumatization; group 1 (n = 40), cephalograms with sinus pneumatization and group 2 (n = 30) cephalograms without sinus pneumatization. Paired t tests and independent-sample t tests were used to compare the changes in each group and between groups.

RESULTS

The distal movement of the maxillary first molars was 4.3 mm for group 1 and 3.5 mm for group 2, with the intrusion of 1.4 mm and 2.5 mm, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference between the 2 groups. Group 1 showed 3.5° of distal tipping of the maxillary second molars, which was significantly greater than the 0.2° in group 2 (P <0.05). The total treatment period, including distalization, was 2.2 years for group 1 and 1.9 years for group 2, but the difference was not significant.

CONCLUSIONS

There was no significant difference in the amount of distal movement and intrusion of the maxillary first molars between groups 1 and 2. Therefore, these results suggest that regardless of sinus pneumatization, molar distalization using temporary skeletal anchorage devices in Class II patients can be performed as a nonextraction treatment.

Cephalometric and model evaluations after molar distalization using modified C-palatal plates in patients with severe arch length discrepancy

INTRODUCTION

This study aimed to evaluate the dentoskeletal and soft-tissue changes after molar distalization using modified C-palatal plates in patients with severe maxillomandibular arch length discrepancies.

METHODS

Twenty-four patients with Class I and II malocclusion (19.0 ± 7.3 years; 17 females and 8 males), who had severe maxillary crowding of >10 mm, and moderate mandibular crowding of >6 mm, underwent molar distalization using modified C-palatal plates and buccal miniscrews with approximately 300 g of force per side. Models were made, and cephalograms were taken before and after treatment. Cephalometric variables and arch dimensions were measured. Paired t test and Wilcoxon rank sum test were used for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

In the maxillary dentition, an average of 12.4 mm of crowding was resolved by molar distalization of 4.4 mm, interproximal stripping of 0.7 mm, and arch expansion. In the mandibular dentition, crowding of 6.7 mm was alleviated by molar distalization of 2.4 mm, an interproximal of 1.5 mm, and additional arch expansion. The incisor positions were maintained (SN-U1, 101.3°; IMPA, 88.8°), and soft-tissue profiles were improved (LL/E-line -1.1 mm; P < 0.001) after treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Maxillary and mandibular tooth-size arch length discrepancy of 12.4 mm and 6.7 mm, respectively, were resolved by molar distalization, interproximal reduction, and arch expansion, whereas incisor positions were maintained, and soft-tissue profiles were improved. This could be a viable treatment option in patients with moderate-to-severe crowding.

Efficiency of maxillary total arch distalization using temporary anchorage devices (TADs) for treatment of Class II-malocclusions: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the treatment effects and post-treatment stability of the maxillary total arch distalization using TADs during the non-extraction treatment of class II malocclusions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Study involved an electronic search followed by hand searching for randomized and non-randomized clinical studies about maxillary total arch distalization using TADs. After data extraction and risk of bias assessment, meta-analysis was performed for dental, skeletal and soft tissue changes using the Generic-inverse variance approach by use of the mean difference and random-effect model.

RESULTS

In total, 1788 articles were identified, 88 full texts were screened and 22 studies were found eligible; 17 of them were included in the quantitative analysis. The means of distalization/distal tipping of the maxillary first molar were 4mm/3.17° in adults, 3.95mm/1.61° in adolescents after treatment with the Modified C-Palatal plate (MCPP), while they were 2.44mm/2.91° with the inter-radicular mini-screws. Both MCPP's treatment in adults and inter-radicular mini-screws resulted in significant intrusion of U6 (1.64 and 0.75mm, respectively), while insignificant extrusion of U6 was resulted in adolescents treated by MCPP. MCPP appliances resulted in palatal inclination/extrusion of maxillary incisors U1 (6.77°/2mm in adults, 7.46°/3.14mm in adolescents). In contrast, inter-radicular mini-screws resulted in less palatal less amount of palatal inclination/insignificant intrusion of U1 (2.42°/0.14mm). MCPP treatment also resulted in significant changes in the skeletal measurements (SNA, ANB, occlusal and mandibular planes). Insignificant differences were found between subgroups in the retraction amount of maxillary incisors, as well as the upper and lower lips. In the follow-up of adolescents treated with MCPP, a significant amount of mesial movement, mesial tipping, and extrusion (2.94mm, 2.84°, and 3.94mm, respectively) was found. However, skeletal and occlusal corrections of the Class II relationship were maintained.

CONCLUSIONS

Maxillary total arch distalization using TADs can be an effective and stable treatment procedure. However, RCTs or prospective cohort studies are highly recommended to establish a clinical evidence regarding their efficiency.

Comparison of treatment effects from total arch distalization using modified C-palatal plates versus maxillary premolar extraction in Class II patients with severe overjet

INTRODUCTION

This study aimed to compare the skeletodental and soft tissue changes with total arch distalization using a modified C-palatal plate (MCPP) and maxillary first premolar extraction treatment in Class II malocclusion patients with severe overjet.

SETTING AND SAMPLE POPULATION

The sample consisted of 46 adult patients who had Class II Division 1 malocclusion with severe overjet; 25 of them received non-extraction treatment with MCPPs (age, 22.5 ± 7.2 years), and 21 received maxillary first premolar extraction treatment (age 23.4 ± 6.5 years).

METHOD

A total of 26 variables were measured on pre- and post-treatment lateral cephalograms. To evaluate the differences between pretreatment and post-treatment in each group, t tests and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests were used. To compare the amount of change between the two groups, MANOVA test was used.

RESULTS

The overjet was significantly reduced in the MCPP and extraction groups by 4.8 mm and 5.4 mm, respectively. However, the two groups had no significant difference in the sagittal, vertical and angular changes of the maxillary incisors. In addition, regarding soft tissue changes, the MCPP and extraction groups showed an increased nasolabial angle of 7.5° and 9.4°, decreased upper lip to the true vertical line of 1.8 mm and 2.2 mm, respectively (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

There was no significant difference in the skeletal changes between the MCPP and extraction groups, and the reduction in overjet was similar in the groups. These results suggest that MCPP might be a viable treatment option for total arch distalization in Class II malocclusion patients with severe overjet.

Factors associated with the maxillary third molar position after total arch distalization using a modified C-palatal plate in adolescents

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the long-term position of erupted third molars after maxillary total arch distalization using modified C-palatal plates (MCPPs) in adolescents and to identify factors associated with these positions.

SETTING AND SAMPLE POPULATION

Sixty-two third molars (male: 20, female: 42) in Class II patients treated with MCPPs and thirty-nine teeth for the Control group (male: 22, female: 17).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Samples were analyzed using panoramic radiographs taken initially (T0), after treatment (T1) and after >3 years retention (T2). Third molars were classified as downward (Group A, N = 31; males: 12, females: 19) and upward (Group B, N = 31; males: 8, females: 23) based on their vertical position after treatment. Analysis of variance and multiple logistic regression analysis were performed.

RESULTS

The vertical position of the third molars of Group A, Group B, and the Control showed a 2.2, 3.5 and 2.7 mm downward movement at T2. However, there was no difference in the amount of third molar eruption among the groups. Regarding factors affecting the vertical distance of the third molar, Age, C8-OP, ∠8-OP and D7-T at the initial affected vertical position of the third molars after molar distalization (P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Group A and B showed no difference in the third molar eruption during retention after total arch distalization. This study suggests that it might be unnecessary to extract the developing third molar before molar distalization in Class II adolescents.

Comparison of Treatment Effects with Modified C-Palatal Plates vs Greenfield Molar Distalizer Appliances in Adolescents

Objectives: The aim of study was to evaluate skeletodental and soft tissue treatment effects and the amount of maxillary molar distalization with modified C-palatal plates vs. Greenfield molar distalizer appliances in adolescents. Study design: The samples consisted of pre- and posttreatment lateral cephalograms collected from 39 patients with Class II malocclusion. The MCPP group was comprised of 21 patients (mean age: 11.7 ± 1.3 years) treated with MCPP appliances while the GMD group included 18 patients (mean age: 11.2 ± 0.9 years) treated with GMD. Fixed orthodontic treatment started with the distalization process in both groups. From each cephalograpm, twenty-nine variables were measured for analysis and then the two groups were compared. Descriptive statistics, a paired t-test, and multivariate analysis of variance were performed to compare the treatment effects within and between the groups. Results: There was significant treatmentrelated change in the sagittal position of the maxilla and the mandible within each group. However, there were no statistically significant inter-group differences. The mean maxillary first molar distalization was 3.96 mm in the MCPP group vs. 2.85 mm in the GMD group. Both groups showed minimal distal tipping, but the maxillary incisors were significantly extruded by 3.04 ± 0.89 mm (P < .001) in GMD group. There was no significant difference in treatment duration between the groups. Conclusions: The maxillary first molars of both the MCPP and GMD groups were effectively distalized and there were significant skeletal changes in the maxilla. However, the maxillary incisors were significantly extruded in the GMD group.