Comparison of transverse dental changes induced by the palatally applied Frog appliance and buccally applied Karad's integrated distalizing system

Sagittal, rotational and transverse changes with three intraoral distalization force systems: Jones jig, distal jet and first class

Background

To compare the maxillary dentoalveolar changes of patients treated with three distalization force systems: Jones Jig, Distal Jet and First Class appliances, using digitized models.

Material and Methods

The retrospective sample comprised 118 digitized models of 59 patients with Class II malocclusion divided into three groups: Group 1 consisted of 22 patients treated with the Jones Jig appliance; Group 2 consisted of 20 patients treated with the Distal Jet, and Group 3 comprised 17 patients treated with the First Class appliance. Pretreatment and post-distalization plaster models of all patients were digitized and evaluated with OrthoAnalyzerTM software. The pretreatment and post-distalization variables regarding sagittal, rotational and transverse changes were compared by the One-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and Kruskal-Wallis tests, depending on normality.

Results

All appliances presented similar amounts of distalization. The Distal Jet appliance promoted significantly smaller mesial displacement of premolars and greater expansion of posterior teeth. The First Class presented the smallest rotation of the maxillary molars and treatment time.

Conclusions

The distalizers were effective in correcting Class II molar relationship, however, a palatal force seems to provide fewer undesirable effects. Additionally, the degree of rotation and expansion was associated with the side of force application.

Key words:Malocclusion, Angle Class II, Orthodontics, Corrective, Distalizers.

Cone-beam computed tomography-guided three-dimensional evaluation of treatment effectiveness of the Frog appliance

Objective

To evaluate the effectiveness of the Frog appliance in three dimensions by using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) images.

Methods

Forty patients (21 boys and 19 girls), averaged 11.7 years old, with an Angle Class II division 1 malocclusion were included in our study. They had either late mixed dentition or early permanent dentition, and the maxillary second molars had not yet erupted. All patients underwent CBCT before and after the treatment for measuring changes in the maxillary first molars, second premolars, central incisors, and profile. Paired-samples t-test was used to compare the mean difference in each variable before treatment and after the first phase of treatment.

Results

The maxillary first molars were effectively distalized by 4.25 mm (p < 0.001) and 3.53 mm (p < 0.05) in the dental crown and root apex, respectively. The tipping increased by 2.25°, but the difference was not significant. Moreover the teeth moved buccally by 0.84 mm (p < 0.05) and 2.87 mm (p < 0.01) in the mesiobuccal and distobuccal cusps, respectively, whereas no significant changes occurred in the root apex. Regarding the anchorage parts, the angle of the maxillary central incisor's long axis to the sella-nasion plane increased by 2.76° (p < 0.05) and the distance from the upper lip to the esthetic plane decreased by 0.52 mm (p = 0.01).

Conclusions

The Frog appliance effectively distalized the maxillary molars with an acceptable degree of tipping, distobuccal rotation, and buccal crown torque, with only slight anchorage loss. Furthermore, CBCT image demonstrated that it is a simple and reliable method for three-dimensional analysis.

Three-dimensional evaluation of maxillary dentoalveolar changes and airway space after distalization in adults

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the changes in position of the maxillary dentition and the airway space after distalization using a modified C-palatal plate (MCPP) in adult patients through CBCT images and to analyze the relationship between the amount of distalization and the changes in the airway space.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

CBCT images of 33 adult Class II patients (22.2 ± 4.0 years old; 27 women and 6 men) treated by total maxillary arch distalization using the MCPP were evaluated before and after distalization. The patients were divided into nonextraction and extraction groups. The changes in the airway space as well as the changes in the positions of the maxillary dentition were evaluated. The distalization effects were calculated and assessed using paired t-tests.

RESULTS

After distalization, the first molar showed significant distalization and intrusion ( P < .001) with no significant rotation of the crown and no significant buccal displacement of its root in the transverse dimension. There were no significant changes in the airway volume or the minimum cross-sectional area of the oropharynx.

CONCLUSIONS

The application of the MCPP resulted in significant total arch distalization without a significant effect on the transverse dimensions or changes in the oropharynx airway space. The MCPP can be considered a viable treatment option for patients with Class II malocclusion.