Tooth-wear patterns in subjects with Class II Division 1 malocclusion and normal occlusion

Introduction: The aim of this study was to investigate the prevalence of tooth wear in adolescents with Class II malocclusion, compared with those with normal occlusion. Methods: The sample consisted of dental casts obtained from 310 subjects, divided into 3 groups: group 1, 110 subjects with normal occlusion (mean age, 13.51 years); group 2, 100 complete Class II Division 1 patients (mean age, 13.44 years); and group 3, 100 half-cusp Class II Division 1 patients (mean age, 13.17 years). Dental wear was assessed by using a modified version of the tooth-wear index. The 3 groups were compared by means of the Kruskal-Wallis and Dunn tests, considering the frequency and the severity of wear on each surface of each group of teeth. The level of statistical significance was set at 5%. Results: The normal occlusion group had statistically greater tooth wear on the palatal surfaces of the maxillary central incisors and the incisal surfaces of the maxillary canines than the corresponding surfaces in both Class II malocclusion groups. The complete and half-cusp Class II Division 1 malocclusion groups had statistically greater tooth wear on the occlusal surfaces of the maxillary second premolar and first molar, the occlusal surfaces of the mandibular premolars, and the buccal surfaces of the mandibular posterior teeth compared with the normal occlusion group. The half-cusp Class II Division 1 malocclusion group had significantly greater tooth wear on the incisal surfaces of the mandibular incisors compared with the complete Class II Division 1 malocclusion group. Conclusions: Subjects with normal occlusion and complete or half-cusp Class II Division 1 malocclusions have different tooth-wear patterns. Tooth wear on the malocclusion subjects should not be considered pathologic but rather consequent to the different interocclusal tooth arrangement. (Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2010; 137: 14. e1-14.e7)

Effects of the pendulum appliance, cervical headgear, and 2 premolar extractions followed by fixed appliances in patients with Class II malocclusion

Introduction: In this retrospective study, we compared the cephalometric effects, the dental-arch changes, and the efficiency of Class II treatment with the pendulum appliance, cervical headgear, or extraction of 2 maxillary premolars, all associated with fixed appliance therapy. Methods: The sample of 82 patients with Class II malocclusion was divided into 3 groups: group 1 patients (n = 22; treatment time, 3.8 years) were treated with the pendulum appliance and fixed orthodontic appliances. Group 2 patients (n = 30; treatment time, 3.2 years) were treated with cervical headgear followed by fixed appliances; group 3 patients (n = 30; treatment time, 2.1 years) were treated with 2 maxillary premolar extractions and fixed appliances. The average starting ages of the groups ranged from 13.2 to 13.8 years. Data were obtained from serial cephalometric measurements and dental casts. The dental casts were analyzed with the treatment priority index. The treatment efficiency index was also used. Results: The 3 treatment protocols produced similar cephalometric effects, especially skeletally. Comparisons among the 2 distalizing appliances (pendulum and cervical headgear) and extraction of 2 maxillary premolars for Class II treatment showed changes primarily in the maxillary dentoalveolar component and dental relationships. The facial profile was similar after treatment, except for slightly more retrusion of the upper lip in the extraction patients. The treatment priority index demonstrated that occlusal outcomes also were similar among the groups. The treatment efficiency index had higher values for the extraction group. Conclusions: The effects of treatment with the pendulum appliance or cervical headgear and extraction of 2 maxillary premolars associated with fixed appliances were similar from both occlusal and cephalometric standpoints. Class II treatment with extraction of maxillary teeth was more efficient because of the shorter treatment time. Differences in maxillary incisor retraction should be noted, but these differences might have been due to greater maxillary dentoalveolar protrusion in the extraction group before treatment. (Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2009;136:833-42)

Strategic maxillary second-molar extraction in Class II malocclusion

Maxillary second-molar extraction in Class II malocclusion is a controversial issue in orthodontics. This treatment protocol is rigorous and not routine. In this case report, we present the orthodontic treatment of a patient with a Class II malocclusion, maxillary crowding, and no mandibular first molars, treated with extraction of the maxillary second molars. The mechanotherapy and indications of maxillary second- molar extraction are discussed. (Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2009;136:878-86)

Long-term stability of Class II malocclusion treated with 2-and 4-premolar extraction protocols

Introduction: The objective of this study was to cephalometrically compare the stability of complete Class II malocclusion treatment with 2 or 4 premolar extractions after a mean period of 9.35 years. Methods: A sample of 57 records from patients with complete Class II malocclusion was selected and divided into 2 groups. Group 1 consisted of 30 patients with an initial mean age of 12.87 years treated with extraction of 2 maxillary premolars. Group 2 consisted of 27 patients with an initial mean age of 13.72 years treated with extraction of 4 premolars. T tests were used to compare the groups` initial cephalometric characteristics and posttreatment changes. Pearson correlation coefficients were calculated to determine the correlation between treatment and posttreatment dental-relationship changes. Results: During the posttreatment period, both groups had similar behavior, except that group 1 had a statistically greater maxillary forward displacement and a greater increase in the apical-base relationship than group 2. On the other hand, group 2 had a statistically greater molar-relationship relapse toward Class II. There were significant positive correlations between the amounts of treatment and posttreatment dentoalveolar-relationship changes. Conclusions: Treatment of complete Class II malocclusions with 2 maxillary premolar extractions or 4 premolar extractions had similar long-term posttreatment stability. (Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2009;136:154.e1-154.e10)

Comparative efficiency of Class II malocclusion treatment with the pendulum appliance or two maxillary premolar extractions and edgewire appliances

The objective of this study was to compare, on study models and initial cephalograms, the efficiency of Class II malocclusion treatment with the pendulum appliance, and with two maxillary premolar extraction protocol. The sample consisted of 48 treated Class II malocclusion patients: group 1 comprised 22 patients (7 males, 15 females) treated with the pendulum appliance, with an initial mean age of 14.44 years and group 2, 26 patients (14 males, 12 females) treated with two maxillary premolar extractions at an initial mean age of 13.66 years. To compare the efficiency of each treatment protocol, the occlusal outcomes were evaluated on dental casts using the Peer Assessment Rating (PAR) Index and the treatment time (TT) of each group was calculated on clinical charts. The degree of treatment efficiency was calculated as the ratio between the percentage of occlusal improvement, evaluated through the PAR index, and TT. Statistical analysis was undertaken by means of t-tests. The findings demonstrated that the two maxillary premolar extraction protocol provided the occlusal outcomes in a shorter time (group 1: 45.7 months, group 2: 23.01 months) and, therefore, demonstrated greater treatment efficiency than the pendulum appliance.

Treatment of a Class II subdivision malocclusion with multiple congenitally missing teeth

This case report describes the treatment of a patient with a Class II Division 1 subdivision right malocclusion with 8 congenitally missing teeth, incompetent lips, and incisor protrusion. The treatment plan included extractions and space closure with retraction of the anterior teeth; symmetric mechanics were used in the mandibular arch and asymmetric mechanics in the maxillary arch. Because of the mechanics used, some midline deviations were expected. Knowledge of diagnosis and treatment planning of asymmetric malocclusions and dental esthetics are essential for success when correcting asymmetic problems, but, even so, small clinical compromises should be expected. (Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2009; 135: 663-70)

Relationship between malocclusion severity and treatment success rate in Class II nonextraction therapy

Introduction: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the treatment success rate of Class II malocclusion without extractions, according to initial severity. Methods: Class II subjects (n = 276) were divided into 2 groups according to the severity of the malocclusion. Group 1 comprised 144 patients with bilateral half Class II malocclusion at the initial mean age of 12.27 years. Group 2 comprised 132 patients who initially had bilateral complete Class II malocclusion at the initial mean age of 12.32 years. The patients` initial and final study models were evaluated with Grainger`s treatment priority index. Chi-square tests were used to test for differences between the 2 groups for categorical variables. Variables regarding occlusal results were compared with independent t tests. Results: Group 1 had a significantly better final occlusal result, a shorter treatment time, and a higher treatment efficiency index. Conclusions: Based on these results, it was concluded that bilateral half Class II malocclusion has a better treatment success rate than bilateral complete Class II malocclusion when treatment is conducted without extractions. (Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2009; 135: 274.e1-274.e8)