Search Results (3)

(1) Background and aim: The effects of functional therapies on dentoalveolar and skeletal structures have been investigated in orthodontics for many years. The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate the changes caused by fixed and removable functional therapy in the mandibular anterior trabecular structures using fractal dimension (FD) analysis. (2) Methods: A total of 60 patients with skeletal and dental class II malocclusion were included in the study and three groups were formed: the untreated control group (CG), the Forsus fatigue-resistant device group (FFRDG), and the Monoblock group (MBG). Bone areas of interest determined in the buccoapical of the mandibular incisors and the symphysis in the lateral cephalometric radiographs taken before (T0) and after (T1) functional therapy were evaluated using FD analysis. The relationship between the FD and IMPA (Incisor Mandibular Plane Angle) angles was evaluated. Parametric and nonparametric tests were used in statistical analysis according to normality distribution. The statistical significance level was determined as p < 0.05. (3) Results: There was no statistically significant difference between the FD values of all groups at T0 (p > 0.05). At T1, buccoapical FD values were significantly lower in FFRDG and MBG compared to the control group (p < 0.05), while symphyseal FD values were not found to be significant (p > 0.05). The IMPA angle was significantly lower in the FFRDG and MBG than in the control group at T0, while it was higher at T1 (p < 0.05). While a significant negative correlation was observed between the IMPA angle and buccoapical FD values in both FFRDG and MBG (p < 0.05), it was not observed with the symphysis FD values (p > 0.05). (4) Conclusions: Trabecular changes caused by functional therapy in the mandibular anterior bone can be evaluated on lateral cephalometric radiographs with FD analysis. It was concluded that orthodontists should ensure controlled changes in the IMPA angle during functional therapy, especially for the decreases in FDs seen in the buccoapical alveolar region due to the forward movement of the mandibular incisors. Full article

This study evaluated the influence of using the Forsus^TM Fatigue-Resistant Device (FFRD) on the third molar (M3) position. Pre- and post-treatment panoramic radiographs of 28 individuals with class II malocclusion (ANB ≥ 4) treated with FFRD were compared to a matched control group (27 individuals) using the Tavano method. A mixed model repeated-measures ANOVA revealed the similar position of the M3s in both groups (p > 0.05) except for the significantly more proximal vertical position of the lower left M3 to the Menton plane in the FFRD group (p = 0.010). Therefore, the treatment with the FFRD device did not affect the position of M3s. Full article

Background: Our study aimed to systematically summarize the dentoskeletal effects of Herbst appliance; Forsus fatigue resistance device; and Class II elastics in adolescent Class II malocclusion. Methods: Five databases; unpublished literature; and reference lists were last searched in August 2022. Randomized clinical trials and observational studies of at least 10 Class II growing patients that assessed dentoskeletal effects through cephalometric/CBCT superimpositions were eligible. The included studies quality was assessed with the RoB 2 and ROBINS-I tools. A random-effects model meta-analysis was performed. Heterogeneity was explored with subgroup and sensitivity analyses. Results: Among nine studies (298 patients); two-to-three studies were included in each meta-analysis. Less post-treatment upper incisor retroclination (<2) and no overbite; overjet; SNA; SNB; and lower incisor inclination differences were found between Herbst/Forsus and Class II elastics. No differences in maxilla; condyle; glenoid fossa; and most mandibular changes were found between Herbst and Class II elastics; except for a greater 1.5 mm increase in mandibular length and right mandibular ramus height (1.6 mm) with Herbst. Conclusions: Herbst and Class II elastics corrected the molar relationship; but Herbst moved the lower molars more mesially. Apart from an additional mandibular length increase; no other dental and anteroposterior skeletal difference was found. Forsus was more effective in molar correction; overjet reduction; and upper incisor control than Class II elastics. Trial registration number OSF: 10.17605/OSF.IO/8TK3R. Full article