Biomechanics of a modified Pendulum appliance--theoretical considerations and in vitro analysis of the force systems

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.

Comparison of cytokine level changes in gingival crevicular fluid between the aligner and pendulum appliance during early molar distalization : A single-center, prospective, observational study

PURPOSE

There is currently a lack of evidence pertaining to gingival crevicular fluid cytokine levels in patients treated with the pendulum appliance. This study aimed to compare changes in cytokine secretion levels in gingival crevicular fluid (GFC) between the aligner and pendulum appliance in patients undergoing molar distalization.

METHODS

GFC samples were collected from 28 participants with asymmetrical dental class II malocclusion who were undergoing molar distalization using aligners or pendulum appliances. An enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay was used to detect cytokine secretion levels during asymmetrical molar distalization for up to 14 days. Periodontal health indices and tooth movements were also assessed.

RESULTS

No significant difference was found for the distalization distance between the two appliances. The Silness and Loe Plaque Index and Lobene Modified Gingival Index increased in the pendulum group but not in the aligner group at 14 days. Interleukin-1β and tumor necrosis factor‑α were upregulated in both groups. In the pendulum group, receptor activator of nuclear factor kappa‑Β ligand and osteoprotegerin secretion levels were significantly upregulated and downregulated, respectively; smaller changes in these two cytokines were observed in the aligner group.

CONCLUSIONS

Pendulum appliances exert stronger forces than aligners, which cause more changes in the secretion of inflammatory mediators in young patients.

Efficiency of the skeletonized Pendulum K appliance for non-compliance maxillary molar distalization : A clinical pilot study

PURPOSE

Conventional anchorage with exclusively intraorally anchored appliances for non-compliance molar distalization combines a palatal acrylic button with periodontal anchorage. This type of anchorage is critically discussed because of the temporary hygienic impairment of the palate and the uncertain anchoring quality of the button. A purely dentally/periodontally anchored Pendulum K appliance was developed, which is exclusively anchored via four occlusal rests. The aims of this pilot study were to examine the suitability of the skeletonized Pendulum K for distalization of maxillary molars, and to investigate the quality of this alternative anchoring modality.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In all, 10 patients received skeletonized Pendulum K appliances attached to all maxillary premolars for bilateral molar distalization. Supporting anchorage through an acrylic button adjacent to the anterior palate was not used. The pendulum springs were initially activated on both sides with a distalization force of 220 cN each and provided with uprighting and toe-in bends. The specific force/moment system was regularly reactivated intraorally by adjustment of the distal screw.

RESULTS

The study demonstrates the suitability of the skeletonized Pendulum K appliance for the distalization of maxillary molars (3.28 ± 0.73 mm). Side effects on the molars were slight distal tipping (3.50 ± 2.51°/PP, 3.00 ± 1.41°/SN) and mesial inward rotation (average 2.75 ± 7.50° and 4.50 ± 12.77°). Significant anchorage loss occurred in the form of mesialization of the incisors by 1.40 ± 0.82 mm and of the first premolars by 2.28 ± 0.85 mm.

CONCLUSION

The skeletonized Pendulum K appliance allows compliance-free upper molar distalization. Exclusively dental/periodontal anchorage resulted in a lower percentage of molar distalization compared to a conventional anchoring preparation of the Pendulum K with a palatal acrylic button. Anchorage loss had a comparatively stronger effect on the anchoring premolars but less on the incisors. Typical side effects on the molars such as distal tipping and mesial inward rotation were remarkably low.

Occlusal Plane Changes After Molar Distalization With a Pendulum Appliance in Growing Patients with Class II Malocclusion: A Retrospective Cephalometric Study

Objective

This study aimed to evaluate the skeletal and dental changes after distalization with a pendulum appliance in growing patients with Class II malocclusion, focusing on the occlusal plane (OP).

Methods

The sample included 24 patients with Class II malocclusion (10 boys, 14 girls); their mean age was 12.1 years. All patients underwent molar distalization and had 2 serial cephalograms traced at baseline (T1) and after distalization (T2). Angular and linear dental changes were calculated by taking the sella-nasion (SN), palatal plane (PP), and pterygoid vertical as reference. OP inclination was compared with SN, PP, and mandibular plane. The collected data were computed for all the tested variables, and one-way paired t-test was used to assess the significance of the differences between the time points. α was set at 0.05. Multiple linear regressions were used to predict the OP changes.

Results

The mean total treatment time was 8±2 months to obtain a super Class I molar relationship. In T1-T2 interval, statistically significant incisor buccal tipping of 5°±3.6° (p<0.05), first molar distal tipping of 8.9°±8.3° (p<0.001), and second molar tipping of 8.2°±8.1° (p<0.001) were observed. The maxillary first and second molars moved significantly backward by 2.8±3.2 mm (p<0.05) and 3.7±2.7 mm (p<0.001), respectively. Only the premolars showed a statistically significant anchorage loss of 2.7±3.3 mm (p<0.05); overjet increased significantly at 1.3±1.2 mm (p<0.05). Regarding the OP, none of the tested variables showed any statistically significant changes between T1-T2.

Conclusion

The pendulum appliance showed efficacy in distalizing the maxillary first and second molars at the expense of anterior anchorage loss. The OP did not show statistically significant changes after molar distalization.

Treatment efficiency of mini-implant-borne distalization depending on age and second-molar eruption

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficiency of molar distalization depending on age and second-molar eruption using the Beneslider.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Treatment of 51 patients (mean age 17.8 ± 9.6 years) was investigated retrospectively by means of pre- and posttreatment cephalograms. Patients were divided into three groups: 14 children with unerupted upper second molars (group 1), 23 adolescents with second molar in place (group 2), and 14 adults (group 3). The distalization forces applied were 2.4 N in group 1 and 5.0 N in groups 2 and 3. Treatment changes were evaluated and examined statistically for significant differences.

RESULTS

In all patients a Class I molar relationship was achieved. All mini-implants remained stable during treatment. Mean distalization distance as measured by the displacement of the center of resistance was 3.6 ± 1.9 mm (range 1.2-8.5 mm depending on treatment needs). Since no significant tipping was detected, the type of movement can be described as bodily movement. Mean overall distalization speed was 0.6 ± 0.4 mm per month. There were no statistical differences between the groups.

CONCLUSION

We found the Beneslider to be an effective appliance that enables bodily distalization in adequate treatment time. The higher resistance due to erupted second molars can be compensated by the use of higher forces without significantly reducing distalization speed.

Effects of conventional anchorage on premolar root development during treatment with a pendulum appliance

OBJECTIVE

By metrically analyzing orthopantomograms, we aimed in this study to retrospectively investigate whether maxillary premolars used as anchoring teeth during molar distalization with pendulum appliances would reveal inhibited root development.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The upper molars were distalized with a modified pendulum appliance (Pendulum K) in 36 adolescents (14 males, 22 females, mean age 12.3 years). Mean treatment period was 19.5 weeks. Orthopantomograms of each patient were taken at the start (time point T1) and after completion of molar distalization (time point T2). The enlargement of the posterior region was ascertained individually quadrant by quadrant for each radiograph, followed by measurement of the vestibular tooth lengths of the premolars whose root development was for the most part not yet complete. To assess further root development in the premolar region, the differences were calculated between tooth lengths at the start and end of treatment.

RESULTS

During treatment with the pendulum appliance a general increase in tooth lengths in the anchorage region was observed (1.37 +/- 1.70 mm, p<0.0001). Differentiated by dental age, we noted increases in tooth lengths of patients with second molars in the budding stage (patient group PG 1: 0.93 +/- 1.37 mm, p<0.0001) as well as of patients with fully-erupted second molars (patient group PG 2: 1.81 +/- 1.88 mm, p<0.0001). Both groups demonstrated greater increases in the second premolars than the first premolars; the increases group-wise were larger in PG 2 than PG 1. However, both the group comparison (PG 1 versus PG 2) and the side comparison (right versus left) (differentiated into first and second molars) showed no statistically relevant differences. Visual assessment of the radiographs revealed no evidence of treatment-related root deviations.

CONCLUSION

A highly complex system of forces acts on the anchoring teeth during molar distalization with the conventionally-anchored Pendulum K. However, the Pendulum K appliance's specific biomechanics make it possible to transfer the reactive forces and moments to the anchorage unit so that they remain within the physiological range, allowing uninhibited premolar root development. This also applies after completed eruption of the second molars, when the treatment period and hence duration of exposure to the active and reactive forces and moments arising during molar distalization are comparatively increased.

Maxillary molar distalization with noncompliance intramaxillary appliances in Class II malocclusion. A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To use published data to evaluate quantitatively the dental effects of noncompliance intramaxillary appliances in individuals with Class II malocclusion.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A literature search was carried out identifing 13 prospective or retrospective clinical studies matching inclusion criteria. Only appliances with conventional anchorage designs were considered for the review. The data provided in these publications were grouped and analyzed in terms of molar distalization, tipping and vertical movements, and incisor and premolar mesialization, tipping, and vertical movements.

RESULTS

Maxillary first molars showed distal crown movement and tipping greater than the mesial crown movement and tipping shown by incisors and premolars. Vertical movements of incisors and premolars were in general extrusive, but molars were intrusive or extrusive, depending on the study and the type of appliance used. Appliances that acted palatally seemed to display a smaller distal tipping movement, as well as smaller incisor and premolar mesial tipping movements, when compared with those that acted buccally. Friction-free appliances, namely the pendulum, produced a large amount of mesiodistal movement and tipping, if no therapeutic uprighting activation was applied.

CONCLUSIONS

Noncompliance intramaxillary molar distalization appliances all act by distalizing molars with a concomitant and unavoidable loss of anchorage, as revealed by incisor and premolar mesial movement. Buccal acting and palatal acting appliances demonstrate almost similar results, with palatal acting appliances showing less tipping. Friction-free palatal acting appliances appear to produce better molar distalizing effects, but with a concomitant notable loss of anchorage.