Objectives Three-dimensional evaluation of skeletal mandibular changes following Herbst appliance treatment. Setting and Sample Population Retrospective case–control study, based on a sample size calculation. Twenty-five pubertal patients treated with Herbst appliance (HAG), and 25 matched Class II patients who received other non-orthopaedic dental treatments (CG). Material and Methods Three-dimensional models were generated from pre-treatment (T0) and post-treatment (T1) cone beam computed tomograms. Volumetric registration on the cranial base was used to assess mandibular displacement; volumetric regional registration was performed to evaluate mandibular growth. Quantitative measurements of X, Y, Z and 3D Euclidian changes, and also qualitative visualization by colour-mapping and semi-transparent overlays were obtained. Results Downward displacement of the mandible was observed in both HAG and CG (2.4 mm and 1.5 mm, respectively). Significant forward displacement of the mandible was observed in the HAG (1.7 mm). HAG showed greater 3D superior and posterior condylar growth than the CG (3.5 mm and 2.0 mm, respectively). Greater posterior growth of the ramus was noted in the HAG than in CG. Conclusions Immediately after Herbst therapy, a significant mandibular forward displacement was achieved, due to increased bone remodelling of the condyles and rami compared to a comparison group. Three-dimensional changes in the direction and magnitude of condylar growth were observed in Herbst patients.

Objectives To perform a three‐dimensional evaluation of the position of the condyles in patients treated with Herbst appliance (HA) in two stages of cervical vertebral maturation. Setting and sample population Retrospective case‐control study. Pubertal Herbst group (PHG; n = 24, mean age 14.5 years, CS 3 and CS 4) and pre‐pubertal Herbst group (PPHG; n = 17, mean age 9.9 years, CS 1 and CS 2) were contrasted with comparison groups of non‐orthopaedically treated Class II patients in pubertal (PCG; n = 17, mean age 13.9 years) and pre‐pubertal maturational stages (PPCG; n = 18, mean age 10.6 years). Materials and Methods Cone‐beam computer tomography scans were taken before treatment (T0) and at T1 after 8 to 12 months. Point‐to‐point measurements of the displacement of the condyles between T0 and T1, relative to the glenoid fossae, were performed in the X, Y, Z and 3D perspectives. Qualitative assessments using semi‐transparent overlays and colour mapping also were produced. Results The displacement of the condyles within the glenoid fossae in the treated groups was small (<0.75 mm; P > .05). Relative to the glenoid fossa, condylar position at T1 was similar to T0 in pre‐pubertal and pubertal groups (P > .05). Similar condylar rotations from T0 to T1 were observed in Herbst and comparison groups, and no significant difference was found between pre‐pubertal and pubertal patients. Conclusions Regardless the stage of skeletal maturation, HA treatment did not change the condyle‐glenoid fossa relationship.

No abstract