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.

Cephalometric evaluation of Class II malocclusion treatment with cervical headgear and mandibular fixed appliances

The present study aimed to evaluate the cephalometric changes in Class II patients treated exclusively with cervical headgear (CHG) in the maxillary arch and fixed appliances in the mandibular arch as compared with a control group. The sample comprised 82 lateral cephalograms obtained pre- (T1) and post- (T2) treatment/observation of 41 subjects, divided into two groups: group 1-25 Class II division 1 patients (20 females and five males), with a mean pre-treatment age of 10.4 years, treated for a mean period of 2.5 years and group 2-16 Class II untreated subjects (12 females and four males), with a mean initial age of 9.9 years, followed for a mean period of 2.2 years. Treatment changes between the groups were compared by means of t-tests. The results showed restriction of maxillary forward displacement and also a restriction in maxillary length growth, improvement in the maxillomandibular relationship, restriction of mandibular incisor vertical development, reduction in overjet and overbite, and improvement in molar relationship. It was concluded that this treatment protocol corrected the Class II malocclusion characteristics primarily through maxillary forward growth restriction.

Class II malocclusion treatment using high-pull headgear with a splint: a systematic review

Objective: To systematically review the scientific evidence pertaining to the effectiveness of high-pull headgear in growing Class II subjects. Methods: A literature survey was performed by electronic database search. The survey covered the period from January 1966 to December 2008 and used Medical Subject Headings (MeSH). Articles were initially selected based on their titles and abstracts; the full articles were then retrieved. The inclusion criteria included growing subjects between 8 to 15 years of age, Class II malocclusion treatment with high-pull headgear, and a control group with Class II malocclusion. References from selected articles were hand-searched for additional publications. Selected studies were evaluated methodologically. Results: Four articles were selected; none were randomized controlled trials. All of the articles clearly formulated their objectives and used appropriate measures. The studies showed that high-pull headgear treatment improves skeletal and dental relationship, distal displacement of the maxilla, vertical eruption control and upper molars distalization. One of the studies showed a slight clockwise rotation of the palatal plane; the others showed no significant treatment effect. The mandible was not affected by the treatment. Conclusion: While there is still a lack of strong evidence demonstrating the effects of high-pull headgear with a splint, other studies indicate that the AP relations improve due to distalization of the maxilla and upper molars, with little or no treatment effects in the mandible. Greater attention to the design should be given to improve the quality of such trials. © 2013 Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics.

Treatment stability in patients with Class II malocclusion treated with 2 maxillary premolar extractions or without extractions

Introduction: The purpose of this study was to compare the occlusal stability of Class II malocclusion treatment with and without extraction of 2 maxillary premolars. Methods: A sample of 59 records from patients with complete Class II malocclusion was used. This sample was divided into 2 groups with the following characteristics: group 1, comprising 29 patients treated without extractions, and group 2, comprising 30 patients treated with extraction of 2 maxillary premolars. Dental cast measurements were obtained before and after treatment and at a minimum of 2.4 years after treatment. The pretreatment, posttreatment, and postretention occlusal statuses were evaluated with the peer assesment rating index. The occlusal indexes at the postretention stage and the posttreatment changes and percentages of posttreatment changes were compared with t tests. Results: The nonextraction and the 2 maxillary premolar extraction treatment protocols of complete Class II malocclusions had no statistically significant differences in occlusal stability. Conclusions: Finishing Class II malocclusion treatment with the molars in a Class II relationship has similar occlusal stability as finishing with the molars in a Class I relationship. (Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2010;138:16-22)

Class II malocclusion occlusal severity description

OBJECTIVES: It is well known that the efficacy and the efficiency of a Class II malocclusion treatment are aspects closely related to the severity of the dental anteroposterior discrepancy. Even though, sample selection based on cephalometric variables without considering the severity of the occlusal anteroposterior discrepancy is still common in current papers. In some of them, when occlusal parameters are chosen, the severity is often neglected. The purpose of this study is to verify the importance given to the classification of Class II malocclusion, based on the criteria used for sample selection in a great number of papers published in the orthodontic journal with the highest impact factor. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A search was performed in PubMed database for full-text research papers referencing Class II malocclusion in the history of the American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics (AJO-DO). RESULTS: A total of 359 papers were retrieved, among which only 72 (20.06%) papers described the occlusal severity of the Class II malocclusion sample. In the other 287 (79.94%) papers that did not specify the anteroposterior discrepancy severity, description was considered to be crucial in 159 (55.40%) of them. CONCLUSIONS: Omission in describing the occlusal severity demands a cautious interpretation of 44.29% of the papers retrieved in this study.

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 study of the Frankel (FR-2) and bionator appliances in the treatment of Class II malocclusion

The purpose of this investigation was to compare the dentoalveolar and skeletal cephalometric changes produced by the Frankel (FR-2) and bionator appliances in persons with Class 11 malocclusion. Lateral cephalograms were available for 66 patients of both sexes, who were divided into 3 groups of 22. The control group included untreated Class 11 children, with an initial mean age of 8 years 7 months; they were followed without treatment for 13 months. The FR-2 appliance group had an initial mean age of 9 years; those children were treated for a mean period of 17 months. The bionator group initially had a mean age of 10 years 8 months; on average, they were treated for 16 months. The results demonstrated no significant changes in maxillary growth during the evaluation period. Both appliances showed statistically significant increases in mandibular growth and mandibular protrusion, with greater increases in patients treated in the bionator group. Both experimental groups showed an improvement in the maxillomandibular relationship. There were no significant changes in growth direction, while the bionator group had a greater increase in posterior facial height. Both appliances produced similar labial tipping and protrusion of the lower incisors, lingual inclination, retrusion of the upper incisors, and a significant increase in mandibular posterior dentoalveolar height. The major treatment effects of bionator and FR-2 appliances were dentoalveolar, with a smaller, but significant, skeletal effect.

Long-term skeletal and dental effects and treatment timing for functional appliances in Class II malocclusion

Objective: To analyze the long-term skeletal and dentoalveolar effects and to evaluate treatment timing of Class II treatment with functional appliances followed by fixed appliances.Materials and Methods: A group of 40 patients (22 females and 18 males) with Class II malocclusion consecutively treated either with a Bionator or an Activator followed by fixed appliances was compared with a control group of 20 subjects (9 females and 11 males) with untreated Class II malocclusion. Lateral cephalograms were available at the start of treatment (mean age 10 years), end of treatment with functional appliances (mean age 12 years), and long-term observation (mean age 18.6 years). The treated sample also was divided into two groups according to skeletal maturity. The early-treatment group was composed of 20 subjects (12 females and 8 males) treated before puberty, while the late-treatment group included 20 subjects (10 females and 10 males) treated at puberty. Statistical comparisons were performed with analysis of variance followed by Tukey's post hoc tests.Results: Significant long-term mandibular changes (Co-Gn) in the treated group (3.6 mm over the controls) were associated with improvements in the skeletal sagittal intermaxillary relationship, overjet, and molar relationship (similar to 3.0-3.5 mm). Treatment during the pubertal peak was able to produce significantly greater increases in total mandibular length (4.3 mm) and mandibular ramus height (3.1 mm) associated with a significant advancement of the bony chin (3.9 mm) when compared with treatment before puberty.Conclusion: Treatment of Class II malocclusion with functional appliances appears to be more effective at puberty. (Angle Orthod. 2013;83:334-340.)

Three-dimensional dental arch changes of patients submitted to orthodontic-surgical treatment for correction of Class II malocclusion

Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq)

Treatment times of Class II malocclusion: four premolar and non-extraction protocols

The purpose of this study was to retrospectively compare the treatment times of Class II division 1 malocclusion subjects treated with four first premolar extractions or a non- extraction protocol and fixed edgewise appliances. Eighty- four patients were selected and divided into two groups. Group 1, treated with four first premolar extractions, consisted of 48 patients (27 males and 21 females) with a mean age of 13.03 years and group 2, treated without extractions, consisted of 36 patients (18 males and 18 females) with a mean age of 13.13 years. Group 2 was subdivided into two subgroups, 2A consisting of 16 patients treated in one phase and 2B consisting of 20 patients treated in two phases. The initial and final Treatment Priority Index (TPI), initial ages, initial mandibular crowding, and treatment times of groups 1 and 2 were compared with t- tests. These variables were also compared between group 1 and the subgroups with analysis of variance followed by Tukey's tests. The treatment times for groups 1 and 2 and subgroups 2A and 2B were 2.36, 2.47, 2.25, and 2.64 years, respectively, which were not significantly different. Treatment times with non-extraction and four premolar extraction protocols are similar.

Prospective study of dentoskeletal changes in class II division malocclusion treatment with twin force bite corrector

Objective: To evaluate the dentoskeletal changes of Class II malocclusion treatment with the Twin Force Bite Corrector (TFBC). Materials and Methods: The sample comprised 86 lateral cephalograms obtained from 43 subjects with Class II division 1 malocclusion; the subjects were divided into two groups. The experimental group comprised 23 patients with a mean initial age of 12.11 years who were treated with the TFBC for a mean period of 2.19 years. The control group included 40 lateral cephalograms from 20 Class II nontreated patients, with an initial mean age of 12.55 years and a mean observation period of 2.19 years. The lateral cephalograms were evaluated before and after orthodontic treatment in group 1 and in the beginning and end of the observation period in group 2. t-Tests were used to compare the initial and final cephalometric characteristics of the groups as well as the amount of change. Results: The experimental group presented greater maxillary growth restriction and mandibular retrusion than the control group, as well as greater maxillomandibular relationship improvement and greater labial tipping of the mandibular incisors. The results also showed a greater decrease in overbite and overjet in the experimental group, and there were no statistically significant differences in the craniofacial growth pattern between groups. Conclusions: The TFBC promotes restriction of anterior maxillary displacement without significant changes in mandibular length and position and improvement of maxillomandibular relationship without changes in facial growth and significant buccal tipping of mandibular incisors. Class II correction with the TFBC occurred primarily as a result of dentoalveolar changes.

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)

Class I malocclusion treatment: Influence of a missing mandibular incisor on anterior guidance

This case report describes the orthodontic treatment of a patient with a deep-overbite Angle Class I malocclusion, agenesis of a mandibular central incisor, and 2 supernumerary teeth, which caused impaction of the mandibular first premolars. The 15-year-old patient also had a convex profile, maxillary dentoalveolar protrusion, and deficiency of space for the correct alignment of teeth. Therefore, treatment consisted of fixed appliance therapy, cervical headgear, extraction of the supernumeraries and the mandibular and maxillary first premolars, and mesiodistal reduction of the maxillary incisors to solve the arch perimeter discrepancy as much as possible with interproximal stripping. This method of treatment significantly improved the patient`s facial and dental esthetics and provided a good functional occlusion, despite the absence of a mandibular incisor, which generally impairs achieving adequate incisal guidance. (Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2010;138:109-17)

Nd : YAG laser clinical assisted in class II furcation treatment

The Nd:YAG laser efficacy associated with conventional treatment for bacterial reduction has been investigated throughout literature. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the bacterial reduction after Nd:YAG laser irradiation associated with scaling and root planning in class II furcation defects in patients with chronic periodontitis. Thirty-four furcation lesions were selected from 17 subjects. The control group received conventional treatment, and the experimental group received the same treatment followed by Nd:YAG laser irradiation (100 mJ/pulse; 15 Hz; 1.5 W, 60 s, 141.5 J/cm(2)). Both treatments resulted in improvements of most clinical parameters. A significant reduction of colony forming unit (CFU) of total bacteria number was observed in both groups. The highest reduction was noted in the experimental group immediately after the treatment. The number of dark pigmented bacteria and the percentage of patients with Porphyromonas gingivalis, Prevotella intermedia, and Actinobacillus actinomycetemcomitans reduced immediately after the treatment and returned to values close to the initial ones 6 weeks after the baseline for both groups. The Nd:YAG laser associated with conventional treatment promoted significant bacterial reduction in class II furcation immediately after irradiation, although this reduction was not observed 6 weeks after the baseline.