Literature DB >> 19852635

Long-term dentoskeletal changes with the Bionator, Herbst, Twin Block, and MARA functional appliances.

Nicole J Siara-Olds1, Valmy Pangrazio-Kulbersh, Jeff Berger, Burcu Bayirli.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine if the long-term dentoskeletal changes in patients treated with tooth-borne functional appliances were comparable to each other and to matched controls.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The experimental sample consisted of 80 consecutively treated patients who were equally divided into Bionator, Herbst, Twin Block, and mandibular anterior repositioning appliance (MARA) groups. The control group comprised 21 children with untreated skeletal Class II malocclusions. Lateral cephalograms were taken for the treated group at T1 (initial records), T2 (completion of functional therapy), and T3 (completion of fixed appliance therapy). A repeated measure analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to assess the differences between and within groups. If ANOVA results were significant, Tukey-Kramer tests were used to determine where the significant differences occurred.
RESULTS: (1) Temporary restriction of maxillary growth was found in the MARA group (T2-T1). (2) SNB increased more with the Twin Block and Herbst groups when compared with the Bionator and MARA groups. (3) The occlusal plane significantly changed in the Herbst and Twin Block groups. (4) The Twin Block group expressed better control of the vertical dimension. (5) The overbite, overjet, and Wits appraisal decreased significantly with all of the appliances. (6) The Twin Block group had significant flaring of the lower incisors at the end of treatment. (7) Over the long-term, there were no significant soft tissue changes among treated and untreated subjects.
CONCLUSIONS: No significant dentoskeletal differences were observed long-term, among the various treatment groups and matched controls.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 19852635      PMCID: PMC8978735          DOI: 10.2319/020109-11.1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Angle Orthod        ISSN: 0003-3219            Impact factor:   2.079


  39 in total

1.  Effectiveness of early treatment of Class II malocclusion.

Authors:  Timothy T Wheeler; Susan P McGorray; Calogero Dolce; Marie G Taylor; Gregory J King
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  2002-01       Impact factor: 2.650

2.  Quantitative analysis of temporomandibular joint adaptations to protrusive function.

Authors:  J A McNamara; D S Carlson
Journal:  Am J Orthod       Date:  1979-12

3.  Skeletal Class II patterns in the primary dentition.

Authors:  Arndt Klocke; Ram S Nanda; Bärbel Kahl-Nieke
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 2.650

4.  "Effective condylar growth" and chin position changes in Herbst treatment: a cephalometric roentgenographic long-term study.

Authors:  H Pancherz; S Ruf; P Kohlhas
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  1998-10       Impact factor: 2.650

5.  A comparison of one-stage and two-stage nonextraction alternatives in matched Class II samples.

Authors:  F A Livieratos; L E Johnston
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  1995-08       Impact factor: 2.650

6.  Treatment of identical twins with Frankel and Herbst appliances: a comparison of results.

Authors:  V Pangrazio-Kulbersh; J L Berger
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  1993-02       Impact factor: 2.650

7.  The mechanism of Class II correction in Herbst appliance treatment. A cephalometric investigation.

Authors:  H Pancherz
Journal:  Am J Orthod       Date:  1982-08

8.  The effect of continuous bite jumping on the dentofacial complex: a follow-up study after Herbst appliance treatment of class II malocclusions.

Authors:  H Pancherz
Journal:  Eur J Orthod       Date:  1981       Impact factor: 3.075

9.  Treatment of class II malocclusions by jumping the bite with the Herbst appliance. A cephalometric investigation.

Authors:  H Pancherz
Journal:  Am J Orthod       Date:  1979-10

10.  Treatment effects produced by the Bionator appliance. Comparison with an untreated Class II sample.

Authors:  Marcio R Almeida; José F C Henriques; Renato R Almeida; Renata R Almeida-Pedrin; Weber Ursi
Journal:  Eur J Orthod       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 3.075

View more
  24 in total

1.  Treatment of class ii in adulthood by forsus frd device.

Authors:  F DE Nuccio; M M D'Emidio; F DE Nuccio
Journal:  Oral Implantol (Rome)       Date:  2017-02-14

2.  This study seems extremely problematic in terms of its methodology and the conclusions drawn.

Authors:  Henning Madsen
Journal:  J Orofac Orthop       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 1.938

Review 3.  Treatment effects of fixed functional appliances in patients with Class II malocclusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Vasileios F Zymperdikas; Vasiliki Koretsi; Spyridon N Papageorgiou; Moschos A Papadopoulos
Journal:  Eur J Orthod       Date:  2015-05-19       Impact factor: 3.075

4.  Comparison of early treatment outcomes rendered in three different types of malocclusions.

Authors:  Valmy Pangrazio-Kulbersh; He-Kyong Kang; Archana Dhawan; Riyad Al-Qawasmi; Rafael Rocha Pacheco
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2018-03-07       Impact factor: 2.079

5.  Reaction of facial soft tissues to treatment with a Herbst appliance.

Authors:  P Meyer-Marcotty; J Kochel; U Richter; F Richter; Angelika Stellzig-Eisenhauer
Journal:  J Orofac Orthop       Date:  2012-03-07       Impact factor: 1.938

6.  Twenty-year follow-up of functional treatment with a bionator appliance: A retrospective dental cast analysis.

Authors:  Rebecca Jungbauer; Vasiliki Koretsi; Peter Proff; Ingrid Rudzki; Christian Kirschneck
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2019-09-04       Impact factor: 2.079

7.  Dental and skeletal changes in patients with mandibular retrognathism following treatment with Herbst and pre-adjusted fixed appliance.

Authors:  Fabio de Abreu Vigorito; Gladys Cristina Dominguez; Luís Antônio de Arruda Aidar
Journal:  Dental Press J Orthod       Date:  2014 Jan-Feb

8.  Class II correction in orthodontic patients utilizing the Mandibular Anterior Repositioning Appliance (MARA).

Authors:  Anil Ardeshna; Frank Bogdan; Shuying Jiang
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2019-01-02       Impact factor: 2.079

9.  Three-dimensional treatment outcomes in Class II patients treated with the Herbst appliance: a pilot study.

Authors:  Megan LeCornu; Lucia H S Cevidanes; Hongtu Zhu; Chih-Da Wu; Brent Larson; Tung Nguyen
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  2013-12       Impact factor: 2.650

10.  Treatment effects of the mandibular anterior repositioning appliance in patients with Class II skeletal malocclusions.

Authors:  Marcelo N Kegler Pangrazio; Valmy Pangrazio-Kulbersh; Jeffrey L Berger; Burcu Bayirli; Amin Movahhedian
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2012-03-21       Impact factor: 2.079

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.