Moschos A. Papadopoulos

Papadopoulos, Moschos A.

doi:10.1590/s1415-54192009000200004

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, mandibular retrognathism is accepted to be the most common variant of Class II malocclusion 2 . The treatment options for Class II growing patients include extraoral headgears, full fixed appliances with inter‐maxillary elastics and/or teeth extractions and removable functional appliances 3 . The latter has been used commonly to achieve mandibular advancement to correct the Class II malocclusion 2 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Skeletal and dental effects of Herbst appliance anchored with temporary anchorage devices: A systematic review with meta‐analysis

Al-Dboush

Soltan

Rao

et al. 2021

Orthod Craniofacial Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The aim was to evaluate the efficiency of using temporary anchorage devices (TADs) in minimizing the anchorage loss and increasing the skeletal effects during correction of Class II malocclusion with Herbst appliance. Materials and methods Search without restrictions was performed up to January 2021 in three electronic databases (CENTRAL, MEDLINE and EMBASE) for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), prospective and retrospective cohort studies. The included studies assessed the dental and skeletal changes in Class II malocclusion patients who were treated using Herbst appliance with or without TADs. The strength of evidence was ranked using GRADE. Results Fifty‐five records were initially retrieved. A total of 6 studies with 198 patients were finally considered. 4 studies were included in the meta‐analysis. The meta‐analysis showed that using TADs with acrylic splint Herbst appliance was effective in controlling the inclination of mandibular incisors by a mean difference of −5.49 degrees (95% C.I [−7.36, −3.63], P < .001) when compared to Herbst appliance alone. The results showed also that incorporating TADs with Herbst treatment resulted in greater mandibular skeletal effects including increasing mandibular bone base length by mean difference of 2.22 mm (95% C.I [0.82. 3.61], P = .002) and mandibular length by mean difference of 3.7 mm (95% C.I [1.55, 5.85], P < .001) when compared to Herbst appliance alone. Conclusions Based on a very low level of confidence, it seems that incorporating TADs during orthodontic treatment with Herbst appliance results in minimizing the anchorage loss and increasing the skeletal effects of Herbst appliance during correction of Class II malocclusion.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%