Association of dentoskeletal morphology with incisor inclination in angle class II patients: a retrospective cephalometric study

Evaluation of modified clear Twin Block aligner in treating adolescents with skeletal class II malocclusion: A two-centre cephalometric study

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the therapeutic effect of modified clear Twin Block (CTB) aligner and traditional twin block (TB) appliance from skeletal, dentoalveolar and soft tissue changes in adolescents with skeletal class II malocclusion.

METHODS

A total of 80 adolescents, included in this study from two medical centres, were distributed into CTB group, TB group and control group based on the treatment they received. Lateral cephalograms at pre-treatment (T1) and post-treatment (T2) were measured by modified Pancherz's cephalometric analysis, and dentoskeletal and soft tissue changes were analysed by independent-sample t-test, paired-sample t-test, ANOVA test and Scheffe's Post Hoc test.

RESULTS

Seventy-five adolescents completed the study, including 32 in the CTB group, 32 in the TB group and 11 in the control group. Both CTB and TB treatment showed significant differences in most dentoskeletal and soft tissue measurements. Compared with the control group, improvements were observed in class II molar relationship through significant different in S Vert/Ms-S Vert/Mi in the CTB group (P < .01) and the TB group (P < .001), as well as deep overjet through significant different in S Vert/Is-S Vert/Ii in the CTB group (P < .001) and the TB group (P < .001). Besides, the CTB group also showed less protrusion of lower incisors and resulted in a more significant improvement in profile with fewer adverse effects on speaking, eating and social activities.

CONCLUSIONS

For adolescents with skeletal class II malocclusion, CTB appliance was as effective as TB on improving dentoskeletal and soft tissue measurements, featuring more reliable teeth control and patient acceptance.

Evaluation of Mandibular Projection in Class II Division 2 Subjects Following Orthodontic Treatment Using Clear Aligners

AIM

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the mandibular growth and/or projection following maxillary incisor proclination, overbite correction, and maxillary dentoalveolar expansion without the use of any class II mechanics, in growing class II division 2 patients treated with clear aligners.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Before and after treatment cone-beam computed tomographic (CBCT) generated lateral and posteroanterior cephalograms of thirty-two patients with skeletal class II division 2, 16 in the treatment group and 16 in the untreated group, were reviewed to evaluate treatment-related changes. Upper incisors were proclined and protruded, as well as upper arch expansion and overbite correction were performed as part of their regular treatment. Cephalometric analysis was performed to evaluate skeletal and dental changes. Unpaired statistical t-tests were performed to determine if significant skeletal class II correction was achieved in the treatment group.

RESULTS

In the treatment group, after treatment, the upper incisors became more proclined and protruded, and the inter-molar width increased while the overbite was reduced compared to the control group. An increase in skeletal mandibular growth and forward projection was also observed, thus contributing to an improvement of the sagittal skeletal relationship as evidenced by ANB and Wits values compared to the control group.

CONCLUSION

A combination of upper incisor proclination, correction of deep overbite, and maxillary dentoalveolar expansion using clear aligners appears to contribute to an improvement of the skeletal class II relationship in growing patients with class II division 2.

CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE

This study shows that unlocking the mandible by correcting a deep overbite, proclining upper incisors, and expanding the upper arch in growing class II division 2 patients can improve skeletal class II using clear aligners. How to cite this article: Mirzasoleiman P, El-Bialy T, Wiltshire WA, et al. Evaluation of Mandibular Projection in Class II Division 2 Subjects Following Orthodontic Treatment Using Clear Aligners. J Contemp Dent Pract 2024;25(4):295-302.

Differential skeletal and dental effects after orthodontic treatment with bite jumping appliance or activator: a retrospective cephalometric study

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this retrospective cephalometric study was to compare treatment outcomes with "bite jumping appliance" (BJA) or Andresen-Häupl type activator. It especially focused on skeletal and dental structures in patients with class II malocclusion. The study hypothesis was that differences in treatment-related changes would occur between patients treated with BJA or activator.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Pre- and posttreatment lateral cephalograms of 73 patients with a class II malocclusion were analyzed. Thirty-seven patients (22 females, 15 males) received treatment with a BJA (pretreatment age 11.1 ± 1.07 years) and 36 patients (20 females, 16 males) with an activator (pretreatment age 11.3 ± 1.12 years). Treatment time was 14.0 ± 1.8 months with BJA and 12.0 ± 2.0 months with activator. Paired t tests were used for intragroup and t tests for independent samples for intergroup comparisons. Results were considered statistically significant at P < 0.05.

RESULTS

The comparison of sagittal and vertical skeletal changes after BJA and activator treatment did not reveal significant differences. Significant changes occurred for lower incisor inclination (P = 0.0367) and overjet (P = 0.0125) only. The reduction of overjet and proclination of lower incisors were more pronounced in BJA patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Both "bite jumping appliance" (BJA) and Andresen-Häupl type activator were able to improve the occlusion of patients with a class II malocclusion. Dental effects were more pronounced for the BJA.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Marked lower incisor proclination contributed significantly to overjet correction in BJA patients. This ought to be respected when choosing a removable functional appliance for patients whose lower incisors are already proclined prior to treatment.

Short-term effects of systematic premolar extraction on lip profile, vertical dimension and cephalometric parameters in borderline patients for extraction therapy--a retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVES

The belief of many orthodontists that premolar extraction therapy leads to a loss of vertical dimension and an aggravated facial profile often predetermines a non-extraction approach. We investigated the short-term effects of systematic premolar extraction in borderline cases for extraction therapy on dentofacial parameters, especially vertical dimension and facial profile.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Of 50 juvenile borderline cases for extraction treatment with a distinct sagittal overjet of 6-9 mm and dental crowding of >6 mm, 25 had all first premolars extracted, whereas the 25 control patients received non-extraction orthodontic treatment with corresponding fixed and removable appliances. Patient selection by multivariate cluster analysis ensured homogeneity at baseline regarding dentoskeletal parameters. Parameter changes were determined with radiographic cephalograms and compared between the extraction and non-extraction group.

RESULTS

The systematic extraction of premolars in borderline patients with a distinct sagittal overjet and crowding did not significantly influence sagittal or vertical skeletal dimension, while leading to a slightly more concave lip profile due to incisor retraction compared to the non-extraction control group.

CONCLUSIONS

The influence of premolar extractions on facial profile is often overestimated, since only slight changes in lip profile are to be expected. In integrated treatment planning, the extraction decision should not be primarily based on concerns about the aggravation of facial profile and loss of vertical dimension.

CLINICIAL RELEVANCE

The decision, whether to extract healthy premolars in borderline patients for extraction therapy, is difficult to make. Our study clarifies the repercussions on cephalometric dentofacial parameters, facilitating future orthodontic extraction decisions.