Lorenzo Franchi1, Tiziano Baccetti. 1. Department of Orthodontics, The University of Florence, Florence, Italy. l.franchi@odonto.unifi.it
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To identify pretreatment cephalometric variables for the prediction of individual mandibular outcomes of functional jaw orthopedics (FJO) followed by fixed appliances in Class II patients treated at the peak in mandibular growth. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was performed on 51 subjects (24 females, 27 males) with Class II malocclusion. First-phase therapy was accomplished with a twin block in 16 subjects, a stainless steel crown Herbst in 15 subjects, and an acrylic splint Herbst in 20 subjects. Lateral cephalograms were available at the start of treatment with FJO and at the completion of fixed appliance therapy. All subjects received FJO at the peak in mandibular growth (CS 3 at T1). Individual responsiveness to Class II treatment including FJO was defined on the basis of the T2-T1 increment in total mandibular length (Co-Gn) when compared with untreated Class II subjects. RESULTS: Discriminant analysis identified a single predictive parameter (Co-Go-Me degrees) with a classification power of 80%. Pretreatment vertical and sagittal parameters were not able to improve the prediction based upon the mandibular angle. CONCLUSIONS: A Class II patient at the peak in skeletal maturation (CS 3) with a pretreatment Co-Go-Me degrees smaller than 125.5 degrees is expected to respond favorably to treatment including FJO. A Class II patient at CS 3 with a pretreatment value for Co-Go-Me degrees greater than 125.5 degrees is expected to respond poorly to treatment including FJO.
OBJECTIVE: To identify pretreatment cephalometric variables for the prediction of individual mandibular outcomes of functional jaw orthopedics (FJO) followed by fixed appliances in Class II patients treated at the peak in mandibular growth. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was performed on 51 subjects (24 females, 27 males) with Class II malocclusion. First-phase therapy was accomplished with a twin block in 16 subjects, a stainless steel crown Herbst in 15 subjects, and an acrylic splint Herbst in 20 subjects. Lateral cephalograms were available at the start of treatment with FJO and at the completion of fixed appliance therapy. All subjects received FJO at the peak in mandibular growth (CS 3 at T1). Individual responsiveness to Class II treatment including FJO was defined on the basis of the T2-T1 increment in total mandibular length (Co-Gn) when compared with untreated Class II subjects. RESULTS: Discriminant analysis identified a single predictive parameter (Co-Go-Me degrees) with a classification power of 80%. Pretreatment vertical and sagittal parameters were not able to improve the prediction based upon the mandibular angle. CONCLUSIONS: A Class II patient at the peak in skeletal maturation (CS 3) with a pretreatment Co-Go-Me degrees smaller than 125.5 degrees is expected to respond favorably to treatment including FJO. A Class II patient at CS 3 with a pretreatment value for Co-Go-Me degrees greater than 125.5 degrees is expected to respond poorly to treatment including FJO.
Authors: Mohamed I Masoud; Hussain Y A Marghalani; Mohamed Bamashmous; Najlaa M Alamoudi; Douaa El Derwi; Ibrahim M Masoud; Veerasathpurush Allareddy; Nour F Gowharji Journal: Prog Orthod Date: 2015-04-27 Impact factor: 2.750
Authors: C Pavoni; E Cretella Lombardo; R Lione; P Bollero; F Ottaviani; P Cozza Journal: Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital Date: 2017-12 Impact factor: 2.124