Twenty-year clinical experience with fixed functional appliances

Moro, Alexandre; Borges, Suellen W.; Spada, Paula Porto; Morais, Nathaly Dias; Correr, Gisele Maria; Chaves, Cauby Maia; Cevidanes, Lúcia Helena Soares

doi:10.1590/2177-6709.23.2.087-109.sar

Cited by 24 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 35 publications

(26 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For this reason, several mandibular anterior repositioning appliances are available in the market (Bionator, Herbst, Forsus, Twin-Force, etc.). 6,7,8 The Forsus FRD appliance is a semi-rigid device that provides greater flexibility in mandibular positioning, thus making it better accepted by patients. The dentoalveolar effects produced by the therapy using Forsus promote sagittal correction of Class II malocclusion.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Esthetic perception of facial profile changes after extraction and nonextraction Class II treatment

Rocha

Casteluci

Ferreira³

et al. 2020

Braz. oral res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This retrospective study evaluated facial profile pleasantness determined by two protocols of Class II treatment. The sample comprised facial profile silhouettes obtained retrospectively from the pretreatment (T1) and posttreatment (T2) cephalograms of 60 patients (42 males and 18 females) divided into two groups. One group of 30 patients (mean age of 12.84 years) was treated with the extraction of maxillary first premolars (mean treatment time of 2.7 years), and the other group of 30 patients (mean age of 12.81 years) was treated with a mandibular advancement appliance (Forsus) (mean treatment time of 2.49 years). The facial profile silhouettes (T1 and T2) were randomly distributed in an album containing one patient per sheet. The examiners consisted of 60 orthodontists and 60 lay individuals, who analyzed the profiles in regard to facial pleasantness, using the Likert scale. A comparison between stages T1 and T2 of the two treatment protocols and between the examiners was performed by mixed-design analysis of variance at a significance level of 5%. The results demonstrated a significant difference between T1 and T2 (greater scores for T2 compared to T1), and between lay individuals and orthodontists (orthodontists assigned higher scores), but with no significant difference between the treatment protocols. Both protocols produced positive effects on the facial profile esthetics, from the standpoint of lay individuals and orthodontists.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Esthetic perception of facial profile changes after extraction and nonextraction Class II treatment

Rocha

Casteluci

Ferreira³

et al. 2020

Braz. oral res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Algunos estudios que abordan el tratamiento temprano han demostrado que estas intervenciones pueden reducir la gravedad de las maloclusiones (8,9). Sin embargo, la información que ha resultado de las investigaciones es criticada frecuentemente, y actualmente, el tratamiento temprano de las maloclusiones se ha convertido en un tema controvertible entre los ortodoncistas (10)(11)(12). Sus partidarios sostienen que las técnicas utilizadas pueden reducir o incluso eliminar la necesidad posterior de tratamiento mediante la corrección de los problemas existentes y la interceptación en las fases de desarrollo (6,13,14).…”

Section: Odontologíaunclassified

“…Sus partidarios sostienen que las técnicas utilizadas pueden reducir o incluso eliminar la necesidad posterior de tratamiento mediante la corrección de los problemas existentes y la interceptación en las fases de desarrollo (6,13,14). Por el contrario, algunos profesionales creen que el tratamiento temprano sólo prolonga el procedimiento y aumenta los costos, porque casi siempre se necesita una segunda fase (12,15).…”

Section: Odontologíaunclassified

Producción científica sobre maloclusión en relación con ortodoncia y ortopedia. Análisis de indicadores bibliométricos

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introducción y objetivo: El tratamiento temprano de las maloclusiones se ha convertido en un tema polémico entre los ortodoncistas, que se debaten en su uso. El propósito del presente artículo es indagar en la producción científica en los últimos cinco años sobre el tema de maloclusiones, y dentro de este campo en la ortopedia como aproximación al tratamiento temprano. Materiales y métodos: Se realizó un estudio de indicadores bibliométricos con análisis temporal para cinco años. Se revisaron las variables de producción anual de artículos, revistas, autores, cooperación y análisis de citas. Resultados: El año de mayor producción fue 2017 tanto para el tema de maloclusión en ortopedia como el de ortodoncia. El autor más citado en el tema de maloclusión en ortodoncia fue Janson Guilherme con 27 publicaciones y 65 citas. En el tema de maloclusión y ortopedia fue Franchi Lorenzo con 18 publicaciones y 88 citas; la revista con mayor cantidad de artículos es la American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. Estados Unidos, Italia y Brasil son los países con más divulgaciones asociadas a estos temas. Conclusiones: Existe una producción en aumento anual de las temáticas de maloclusión y ortodoncia, mientras que la temática de maloclusión y ortopedia cuenta con una producción menor.

show abstract

“…Some currently available rigid fixed functional orthopedic appliances include the Herbst appliance, AdvanSync (also known as Molar to Molar, M2M appliance; Ormco, USA), and Mandibular Anterior Repositioning Appliance (MARA) ( 4 ). These rigid fixed functional appliances have very similar mechanisms, in which they advance the mandible forward 24 hours a day, providing more stimulus for condylar remodeling and growth ( 7 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Orthodontists’ preference on type of rigid fixed functional appliance for skeletal Class II correction: A survey study

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Rigid fixed functional appliances are most commonly used to correct skeletal Class II malocclusions. The objective of this study was to assess orthodontists’ preference of different rigid fixed functional appliances used in the U.S.A for correction of skeletal Class II malocclusions. Material and Methods A survey on use and preference of rigid fixed functional appliances for skeletal Class II correction was emailed to 2,227 members of the American Association of Orthodontists (AAO) in the U.S.A. Frequency distribution of different responses and their association with demographic factors was assessed. Results Out of 140 orthodontists completing the survey, 110 responded as using rigid fixed functional appliances. Eight incomplete responses were eliminated from data analysis. 51.5% (68/132) orthodontists used rigid fixed functional appliances. The most preferred rigid fixed functional appliance was the Herbst appliance with 72% response followed by Mandibular Anterior Repositioning Appliance (24%) and AdvanSync (4%). There was no statistically significant difference in use of rigid fixed functional appliances between different age groups ( p =0.284). However, the 40-54 age group used the most rigid fixed functional appliances in practice, followed by the 25-39 year age group and the 55-69 age group using these appliances the least. There was statistical significance between the type of practice setting one works in and the use of rigid fixed functional appliances in practice ( p =0.022). Conclusions About 52% of orthodontists use rigid fixed functional appliances to correct skeletal Class II malocclusions. The Herbst appliance is the most commonly used and most preferred amongst all rigid fixed functional appliances with a 72% preferred rate. Key words: Orthodontic, Rigid fixed functional appliance, Skeletal Class II, Class II Malocclusion, Mandibular retrognathism, Herbst, Mandibular Anterior Repositioning Appliance (MARA), AdvanSync, Molar to molar, M2M.

show abstract

Twenty-year clinical experience with fixed functional appliances

Cited by 24 publications

References 35 publications

Esthetic perception of facial profile changes after extraction and nonextraction Class II treatment

Esthetic perception of facial profile changes after extraction and nonextraction Class II treatment

Producción científica sobre maloclusión en relación con ortodoncia y ortopedia. Análisis de indicadores bibliométricos

Orthodontists’ preference on type of rigid fixed functional appliance for skeletal Class II correction: A survey study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About