Evaluation of Profile Changes in Class II Individuals Treated by Means of Herbst Miniscope Appliance

The Use of TADs in the Mandibular Arch to Prevent Proclination of the Lower Incisors during the Use of the Mini Scope Herbst Appliance

Class II malocclusions are the most frequent within the Italian population. Normally, these malocclusions are caused by a reduction in a mandibular component whose functional stimulus is still very much cause for debate. The negative effect of all types of Class II functional appliances is in the proclination of the lower incisors, which, in subjects whose incisors are already labially inclined, must be checked at all times to avoid serious consequences to these elements. In this case study, a girl aged 14 years and 5 months presented with Class II malocclusion, 2^nd division with a convex profile and a visibly retruded chin. The lower incisors presented a marked proclination (-1/Go-Gn ini = 107.7°) in a brachyfacial patient. To avoid further inclination of the lower incisors a Herbst appliance was mounted in two separate sittings. The first part of the appliance including the tubes was mounted to the upper jaw allowing the vestibularisation of the upper incisors in order to increase the overjet. Once this was obtained the lower part of the appliance was mounted together with the telescopic arms associated with two temporary anchorage devices (TADs) in positions 36-37 and 46-47, and an anterior section 33-43 with distal loop to which two double metallic ligatures were anchored at the TADs to contrast the negative effect of the appliance. At the end of the first functional phase, the treatment was refined using MBK fixed therapy to finish the case. The orthodontic therapy led to a visible improvement of the profile and the achievement of a first-class dental-skeletal result on both sides. From the cephalometric evaluation carried out immediately after the Herbst appliance treatment at time T1 and at the end of the orthodontic therapy T2 it was possible to verify a slight increase in the inclination of the lower incisors (-1/Go-Gn fin = 108°). In conclusion, it can be said that the use of the skeletal anchorage avoided, in this case, the proclination effect in the lower incisors due to the use of a Herbst appliance.

Can Orthodontic Treatment Be Stable 20 Years after the End of the Treatment Scheme? Treatment of a Class 2, Division 1 Malocclusion with Severe Skeletal Discrepancy and Its 20-Year Follow-Up

Class II malocclusions, after class I malocclusions, are the most frequent in the juvenile Italian population. They are most often skeletal in origin and due to mandibular retrusion. Functional devices seem to have a beneficial effect on the growth of the jaw. Long-term maintenance of the achieved results is essential for therapeutic success in any orthodontic treatment; moreover, the retention phase should last as long as possible, especially in the lower anterior sector. A female patient aged 10 years and 3 months presented a visibly convex profile and a severe mandibular retrusion. The anamnesis brought to light the habit of oral breathing and lower-lip sucking. The cephalometric analysis showed a normodivergent skeletal class II. The first treatment phase involved the use of a Bass type for 12 months at the end of the functional treatment; the second phase of fixed therapy was carried out following the principles of bioprogressive techniques. The photos at the end of treatment show an important improvement in the profile; a full class I ratio of molar and canine teeth was achieved with an excellent interarch relationship and a correction of the V-shaped upper arch. The result is occlusally and profilometrically stable after 2, 4, 5, 10, 14, and 20 years. The maintenance of a stable orthodontic result over time is the result not only of a correct and physiological occlusion but also and above all of a correct diagnosis and correct identification of problems that can cause the malocclusion itself. Flawed habits such as interposition of the lower lip and oral breathing must be intercepted and corrected early in order to correct them and not affect the long-term result of orthodontic treatment. In this case, a functional device associated with an orthodontic fixed finishing and a correct retention phase were necessary to correctly treat a second-class mandibular retrusion whose result remained stable 20 years after the end of therapy.

Treatment of mild Class II malocclusion in growing patients with clear aligners versus fixed multibracket therapy: A retrospective study

Objective

To compare the dental and skeletal effects of intermaxillary elastics on the correction of mild Angle's Class II division 1 malocclusion with clear aligner treatment (CA) versus fixed multibracket (FMB) in growing patients.

Settings and sample population

The study sample consisted of 49 consecutively patients (mean age ± SD 12.9 ± 1.7 years), 32 females and 17 males referred from the School of Orthodontics of the University of Bratislava Comenius (Slovakia). All patients were treated with a non‐extraction orthodontic treatment, 25 with FMB and 24 with CA.

Methods

The cephalometric analysis was performed at the beginning (T0) and the end of the treatment (T1). The t test for unpaired data was carried out to compare cephalometric values at T0 and changes at T1‐T0 between the two groups. The level of significance was set as P < .0035.

Results

The two groups showed no statistically significant differences (ANPg = −0.1°; P = .762) in the correction of the sagittal intermaxillary relation. The analysis of vertical skeletal changes showed no statistically significant effects on mandibular inclination (SN/MP = 0.1°; P = .840). The two treatments had a statistically significant and clinically relevant difference in controlling the inclination of the lower incisors (L1/GoGn = 4.8°, CAG = −0.5°± 3.9°; FMB = 4.3°± 5.8°; P < .001).

Conclusions

Class II elastics combined with CA and FMB produce a similar correction on sagittal discrepancies in growing patients. CA presented a better control in the proclination of the lower incisors. CA and elastics might be a good alternative in the correction of mild Class II malocclusion in cases where a proclination of lower incisors is unwanted.

Treatment Effects of the Herbst Appliance in Class II Malocclusion Patients after the Growth Peak

OBJECTIVE

 The aim of this study was to evaluate dentoskeletal changes in the treatment of Class II malocclusion with the Herbst Cantilever Bite Jumper (CBJ) appliance, associated with multibracket appliances after the growth peak, at pretreatment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

 A sample of 37 individuals was divided into two groups: the experimental group comprised 16 patients treated consecutively for a mean period of 2.52 years with the Herbst CBJ appliance associated with multibracket appliances. A total of 21 subjects (10 males and 11 females) with Class II malocclusion and mean age at T1 of 16.08 years were followed for a mean period of 2.12 years composed the control group. Comparisons between the two groups were performed using initial and final lateral cephalograms. Comparisons between experimental and control groups at pretreatment and of the treatment changes were performed by Mann-Whitney or independent t-tests.

RESULTS

 Experimental group exhibited a significantly greater labial inclination of the mandibular incisors in comparison to the control group. Additionally, significantly greater corrections in overbite, overjet, and molar relationship were observed in the experimental than in the control groups.

CONCLUSION

 The effects of the Herbst CBJ appliance, associated with fixed appliances after the growth peak in Class II malocclusion treatment are correction in molar relationship toward a Class I relationship, decrease of the overjet, decrease of the overbite, and mandibular incisors labial inclination.