Comparison of AdvanSync and intermaxillary elastics in the correction of Class II malocclusions: A retrospective clinical study

Jayachandran, Santhosh; Wiltshire, William A.; Hayasaki, Sandra Márcia; Pinheiro, Fábio Henrique

doi:10.1016/j.ajodo.2016.05.008

Cited by 30 publications

(50 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Also upper incisor inclination to NA and upper incisor position relative to NA were significantly decreased. These results agreed with other studies on PowerScope (6,8) .Similar results were reported with TFBC (14)(15)(16) with AdvanSync (12,13) and with Eureka Spring (20) .…”

Section: Regarding the Skeletal Changessupporting

confidence: 92%

“…This effect is often observed with the use of fixed functional appliances, similar finding in other studies was reported after using PowerScope in treatment of Class II malocclusion (6,7) significant reduction in SNA was also reported with the use of Herbst appliance (10) as well as with Jasper Jumper (11) and after treatment with AdvanSync appliance (12,13) Regarding the mandible there was significant anterior displacement demonstrated by statistically significant increase in SNB (P<0.001), Similar finding was reported in other studies using PowerScope Class II corrector (6)(7)(8)(9) same results were demonstrated with TFBC (14)(15)(16) and also with Herbst appliance (5,10,22) and with mandibular protraction appliance (17) . However other studies demonstrated different results as with MARA (18) .…”

Section: Regarding the Skeletal Changessupporting

confidence: 81%

“…Similar protrusion of lower lip was evident with the use of Herbst appliance (22) and with mandibular protrac-tion appliance (17) as well as in a comparative study between AdvanSync appliance and intermaxillary elastics (13) , TFBC appliance (14 ) revealed same result as for distance between lower lip and S-line and significant anterior movement of lower lip towards the E-line was also reported in a study on TFBC (16) .…”

Section: Regarding the Dento-alveolar Changessupporting

confidence: 77%

“…Significant decrease of mean -5mm in the overjet was reported with Herbst appliance (21) and MPA-IV showed marked reduction in overjet (25) , also studies on AdvanSync appliance reported significant overjet reduction (12,13) . Jasper Jumper appliance resulted in significant ovejet reduction (23,24) .…”

Section: Regarding the Skeletal Changesmentioning

confidence: 92%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Evaluation of the Treatment Outcomes for Class II Malocclusion by Using PowerScope Appliance

Shendy¹,

Ibrahim

Salama

2017

ADJ-for Girls

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Regarding the Skeletal Changessupporting

confidence: 92%

Section: Regarding the Skeletal Changessupporting

confidence: 81%

Section: Regarding the Dento-alveolar Changessupporting

confidence: 77%

Section: Regarding the Skeletal Changesmentioning

confidence: 92%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Evaluation of the Treatment Outcomes for Class II Malocclusion by Using PowerScope Appliance

Shendy¹,

Ibrahim

Salama

2017

ADJ-for Girls

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The Advansync appliance's design, which utilizes only the first permanent molars, allows correcting dental malocclusion simultaneously with the orthopaedic correction of class II, thus saving time (28) . Few studies have investigated the effects of Advansync appliance in relation to Mandibular Anterior Repositioning Appliance (MARA) and Class II elastics, but none has compared it to intermaxillary NiTi coil springs (28,29) .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of Dentoskeletal Changes Accompanying the Treatment of Class II Malocclusion by Advansync Appliance versus Intermaxillary Coil Spring Mechanics

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives:The present study was designed to determine and compare the skeletal, dentoalveolar and soft tissue effects produced by the Advansync functional appliance and intermaxillary NiTi coil springs in the treatment of growing patients with Class II division 1 malocclusion. Subjects and methods: A sample of 19 growing patients, as evaluated by hand wrist radiographs, with age range 12-15 years was divided into two groups. Group I patients were treated with the Advansync appliance (n=10) and Group II patients were treated using intermaxillary NiTi coil springs (n=9). The study was conducted using lateral cephalograms taken before appliance insertion and immediately after appliance removal. Treatment changes were evaluated for each group and compared between both groups. Data were analyzed using Paired sample t-test for each group and Independent t-test for comparing groups together. Results: The use of Advansync and fixed appliances (Group I) resulted in significant decrease in SNA and ANB angles (p≤0.001). Dental changes included retroclination of maxillary teeth, proclination and intrusion of mandibular teeth as well as mesialization of mandibular molars (p≤0.001). On the other hand, SNA and ANB showed non-significant changes for patients treated with intermaxillary NiTi coil springs (Group II) (p≥0.05). While dental changes included retroclination of maxillary teeth, proclination and intrusion of mandibular teeth as well as mesialization of mandibular molars (p≤0.001) which were greater in Group II than Group I. The effects of both treatment modalities showed significant increases in total mandibular length and anterior facial height (p≤0.01 and p≤0.05) with no significant difference between both groups. Lower lip to PtV was the Codex : 44/1810 azhardentj@azhar.edu.eg only soft tissue measurement with significant changes (p≤0.05) for each group and was non-significant when the two groups were compared together. Conclusion: Both treatment modalities were effective in treating Class II division 1 malocclusion. The Advansync appliance produced its effect through maxillary growth restriction and dentoalveolar changes. While the effects of intermaxillary NiTi coil springs were only dentoalveolar, but more than the Advansync appliance.

show abstract

Soft tissue profile changes in Angle class II patients treated with Twin Force or intermaxillary elastics—a comparison

Falcão¹,

Valarelli²,

Canuto

et al. 2020

J Orofac Orthop

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Comparison of AdvanSync and intermaxillary elastics in the correction of Class II malocclusions: A retrospective clinical study

Cited by 30 publications

References 16 publications

Evaluation of the Treatment Outcomes for Class II Malocclusion by Using PowerScope Appliance

Evaluation of the Treatment Outcomes for Class II Malocclusion by Using PowerScope Appliance

Evaluation of Dentoskeletal Changes Accompanying the Treatment of Class II Malocclusion by Advansync Appliance versus Intermaxillary Coil Spring Mechanics

Soft tissue profile changes in Angle class II patients treated with Twin Force or intermaxillary elastics—a comparison

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About