Cargando…
Comparison of Activator-Headgear and Twin Block Treatment Approaches in Class II Division 1 Malocclusion
The purpose was to compare the treatment effects of functional appliances activator-headgear (AH) and Twin Block (TB) on skeletal, dental, and soft-tissue structures in class II division 1 malocclusion with normal growth changes in untreated subjects. The sample included 50 subjects (56% females) ag...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Hindawi Publishing Corporation
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5292161/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28203569 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2017/4861924 |
_version_ | 1782504884098039808 |
---|---|
author | Spalj, Stjepan Mroz Tranesen, Kate Birkeland, Kari Katic, Visnja Pavlic, Andrej Vandevska-Radunovic, Vaska |
author_facet | Spalj, Stjepan Mroz Tranesen, Kate Birkeland, Kari Katic, Visnja Pavlic, Andrej Vandevska-Radunovic, Vaska |
author_sort | Spalj, Stjepan |
collection | PubMed |
description | The purpose was to compare the treatment effects of functional appliances activator-headgear (AH) and Twin Block (TB) on skeletal, dental, and soft-tissue structures in class II division 1 malocclusion with normal growth changes in untreated subjects. The sample included 50 subjects (56% females) aged 8–13 years with class II division 1 malocclusion treated with either AH (n = 25) or TB (n = 25) appliances. Pre- and posttreatment lateral cephalograms were evaluated and compared to 50 untreated class II division 1 cases matched by age, gender, ANB angle, and skeletal maturity. A paired sample, independent samples tests and discriminant analysis were performed for intra- and intergroup analysis. Treatment with both appliances resulted in significant reduction of skeletal and soft-tissue facial convexity, the overjet, and the prominence of the upper lip in comparison to untreated individuals (p < 0.001). Retroclination of maxillary incisors and proclination of mandibular incisors were seen, the latter being significantly more evident in the TB group (p < 0.05). Increase of effective mandibular length was more pronounced in the TB group. In conclusion, both AH and TB appliances contributed successfully to the correction of class II division 1 malocclusion when compared to the untreated subjects with predominantly dentoalveolar changes. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5292161 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | Hindawi Publishing Corporation |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-52921612017-02-15 Comparison of Activator-Headgear and Twin Block Treatment Approaches in Class II Division 1 Malocclusion Spalj, Stjepan Mroz Tranesen, Kate Birkeland, Kari Katic, Visnja Pavlic, Andrej Vandevska-Radunovic, Vaska Biomed Res Int Research Article The purpose was to compare the treatment effects of functional appliances activator-headgear (AH) and Twin Block (TB) on skeletal, dental, and soft-tissue structures in class II division 1 malocclusion with normal growth changes in untreated subjects. The sample included 50 subjects (56% females) aged 8–13 years with class II division 1 malocclusion treated with either AH (n = 25) or TB (n = 25) appliances. Pre- and posttreatment lateral cephalograms were evaluated and compared to 50 untreated class II division 1 cases matched by age, gender, ANB angle, and skeletal maturity. A paired sample, independent samples tests and discriminant analysis were performed for intra- and intergroup analysis. Treatment with both appliances resulted in significant reduction of skeletal and soft-tissue facial convexity, the overjet, and the prominence of the upper lip in comparison to untreated individuals (p < 0.001). Retroclination of maxillary incisors and proclination of mandibular incisors were seen, the latter being significantly more evident in the TB group (p < 0.05). Increase of effective mandibular length was more pronounced in the TB group. In conclusion, both AH and TB appliances contributed successfully to the correction of class II division 1 malocclusion when compared to the untreated subjects with predominantly dentoalveolar changes. Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2017 2017-01-22 /pmc/articles/PMC5292161/ /pubmed/28203569 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2017/4861924 Text en Copyright © 2017 Stjepan Spalj et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Spalj, Stjepan Mroz Tranesen, Kate Birkeland, Kari Katic, Visnja Pavlic, Andrej Vandevska-Radunovic, Vaska Comparison of Activator-Headgear and Twin Block Treatment Approaches in Class II Division 1 Malocclusion |
title | Comparison of Activator-Headgear and Twin Block Treatment Approaches in Class II Division 1 Malocclusion |
title_full | Comparison of Activator-Headgear and Twin Block Treatment Approaches in Class II Division 1 Malocclusion |
title_fullStr | Comparison of Activator-Headgear and Twin Block Treatment Approaches in Class II Division 1 Malocclusion |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of Activator-Headgear and Twin Block Treatment Approaches in Class II Division 1 Malocclusion |
title_short | Comparison of Activator-Headgear and Twin Block Treatment Approaches in Class II Division 1 Malocclusion |
title_sort | comparison of activator-headgear and twin block treatment approaches in class ii division 1 malocclusion |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5292161/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28203569 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2017/4861924 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT spaljstjepan comparisonofactivatorheadgearandtwinblocktreatmentapproachesinclassiidivision1malocclusion AT mroztranesenkate comparisonofactivatorheadgearandtwinblocktreatmentapproachesinclassiidivision1malocclusion AT birkelandkari comparisonofactivatorheadgearandtwinblocktreatmentapproachesinclassiidivision1malocclusion AT katicvisnja comparisonofactivatorheadgearandtwinblocktreatmentapproachesinclassiidivision1malocclusion AT pavlicandrej comparisonofactivatorheadgearandtwinblocktreatmentapproachesinclassiidivision1malocclusion AT vandevskaradunovicvaska comparisonofactivatorheadgearandtwinblocktreatmentapproachesinclassiidivision1malocclusion |