Effects of Sabbagh Universal Spring 2 fixed functional appliance on class II/1 patients at their postpubertal-peak growth period compared with the extraction method

Hemmatpour, Siamak; Mokhtar, Anis; Rakhshan, Vahid

doi:10.1007/s00056-016-0060-2

“…This change was a result of the forward position of the mandibular base using the Powerscope appliance that brought the position of point B forward. That was in agreement with the results of Powerscope studies ((23,14,19,28,16,17) in addition to the following studies (20,25,26,27) using MARA, Churro Jumper, FNFS, JJ, and SUS 2 appliances. On the contrary, studies (11,24) used the Powerscope appliance, and also studies (21,22) using FFRD and TFBC showed no significant change happened in the anteroposterior position of the mandible.…”

Section: Changes In the Skeletal Measurementssupporting

confidence: 91%

“…There was a statistically significant (P ≤ 0.05) decrease in SNA angle which indicated the effect of Powerscope appliance on the restriction of the maxillary base that was agreed with the results reported by other Powerscope studies (23,24,16) in addition to studies (25,26,27) using Churro Jumper, Forsus Nitinol Flat Spring (FNFS), Jasper Jumper (JJ) and Sabbagh Universal Spring 2 (SUS 2) appliances. On the contrary, studies (11,14,18,19,17) using Powerscope appliance and other studies (20,21,22) using Mandibular Anterior Repositioning Appliance (MARA), Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device (FFRD) and Twin Force Bite Corrector (TFBC) appliances showed no statistically significant changes happened to SNA angle and consequently to the maxilla.…”

Section: Changes In the Skeletal Measurementssupporting

confidence: 89%

Three-dimensional evaluation of the efficacy of Powerscope appliance in treatment of skeletal Class 2 malocclusion: A prospective clinical study

El-Hossainy

¹

,

Al-khalefa

²

,

Abouelnour

³

2022

Al-Azhar Journal of Dental Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: This study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of Powerscope appliance in the treatment of skeletal Class II patients by three-dimensional image. Subjects and methods: This study was conducted on 14 orthodontic patients with a mean age of 15.39 ± 1.25 years old. The study included post-pubertal female patients with skeletal Class 2 of ANB angle greater than 4° due to the retruded mandible. Cone-beam computed tomography was made before (T1) and after (T2) installation of the Powerscope appliance. The images were imported into Invivo dental software version 5.2 for the measurements. The collected data were tabulated and statically analyzed using Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 23. Paired t-test was used to study the changes after treatment. The significance level was set at ≤ 0.05. Results: Results showed statistically significant changes regarding skeletal and dental parameters. Conclusions: (1) Powerscope appliance provides an effective tool for the treatment of skeletal Class II adolescent patients. (2) Effects of Powerscope appliance were mainly dental with lesser skeletal effects. (3) The skeletal changes were seen in the mandibular base with minimal maxillary skeletal effects.

show abstract

“…Our study also is surrounded by the same controversies as we cannot delineate the effect of skeletal changes to see any secondary and favorable dentoalveolar or soft-tissue changes. Although the skeletal changes are not so obvious, the overall soft-tissue results are acceptable due to the secondary effects seen on the dentoalveolar components[ 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ] The criteria for diagnosing a typical Class II malocclusion used in this study The pubertal growth assessment done may be controversial as no single method is reliable enough. [ 8 9 10 11 12 13 ] …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Our study also is surrounded by the same controversies as we cannot delineate the effect of skeletal changes to see any secondary and favorable dentoalveolar or soft-tissue changes. Although the skeletal changes are not so obvious, the overall soft-tissue results are acceptable due to the secondary effects seen on the dentoalveolar components[ 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 ]…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The evaluation and clinical efficiency of PowerScope: An original research

Antony

¹

,

Amin

²

,

Hegde

³

et al. 2018

J Int Soc Prevent Communit Dent

14

4

0

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aims and Objectives:Managing mild-to-moderate Class II malocclusion is one of the common and major challenges to orthodontists. Class II discrepancies with mandibular deficiency during active growth are usually treated using myofunctional appliances. Fixed functional appliances evolved due to the noncompliance with conventional myofunctional appliances. One of the latest Class II correctors is the PowerScope appliance. The purpose of this study was to determine the amount, time, and rate of molar correction and efficacy of PowerScope.Materials and Methods:A total of 10 participants, between 15 and 19 years’ age group (mean = 16.8 years; 5 males and 5 females), requiring treatment of Class II malocclusion were considered for this study. All routine records were made. After initial leveling and alignment, lateral cephalogram was taken in standardized natural head position using Planmeca ProMax unit. Later, PowerScope was installed and a patient was monitored every month for further adjustment and reactivation. On achieving Class I molar relation, skeletal, dental, and soft-tissue linear and angular parameters were measured using Dolphin Imaging Software. Amount, rate, and total treatment time for molar correction were measured. Molar correction was calculated by taking S vertical as reference plane. The obtained values were statistically analyzed using paired t-test.Results:There were statistically significant changes seen in dentoalveolar parameters such as lower incisor proclination, mandibular molar advancement, and reduction in both overjet and overbite. In skeletal parameters, due to the anterior positioning of the mandible, sagittal parameters showed statistically significant changes. In the soft tissue, a significant improvement in facial profile was seen, due to the anterior movement of soft-tissue pogonion.Conclusion:The results of this study have shown that statistically significant differences were found in dentoalveolar, soft-tissue, and skeletal parameters.

show abstract

“…In the study of Hemmatpour et al [ 26 ], the authors demonstrated that the nonextraction method significantly increased the N′-Gn′ ( p = 0.029), N′NsPog′ ( n = 0.002), Pog-Pog′ ( p = 0.03), and SS-Ls ( p = 0.001), compared to the extraction group.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Extraction vs. Nonextraction on Soft-Tissue Profile Change in Patients with Malocclusion: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Moon

¹

,

Mohamed

²

,

He

³

et al. 2021

BioMed Research International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives. We aimed to summarize the current evidence regarding the impact of extraction vs. nonextraction in orthodontic treatment on patients’ soft-tissue profile with malocclusion. Methods. Between April 30th and November 30th, 2020, we searched PubMed and SCOPUS for published papers from inception to November 2020 using “orthodontic,” “extraction,” “nonextraction,” and “Malocclusion.” Included studies were summarized, and relevant data were extracted and analyzed using Review Manager 5.4. Results. Pooled data from four controlled trials demonstrated a nonsignificant difference between extraction and nonextraction in terms of SNA ( MD = 0.50 , 95% CI: -0.37, 1.38; p = 0.26 ), SNB ( MD = 0.11 , 95% CI: -1.23, 1.44; p = 0.88 ), FMA ( MD = 1.82 , 95% CI: -2.39, 6.02; p = 0.40 ), IMPA ( MD = 0.06 , 95% CI: -8.83, -8.94; p = 0.99 ), overjet ( MD = − 1.47 , 95% CI: -6.21, 3.26; p = 0.54 ), and overbite ( MD = 0.50 , 95% CI: -1.40, 2.40; p = 0.60 ). On the other hand, the extraction method significantly increased the ANB compared with the nonextraction group ( MD = 0.78 , 95% CI: 0.25, 1.31; p = 0.004 ). Conclusion. The current evidence demonstrated that nonextraction protocols for orthodontic treatment are a safe and effective alternative to extraction protocols; individually tailored treatment strategies should be applied. More randomized controlled trials are critically needed to safely make an evidence-based treatment conclusion.

show abstract

Effects of Sabbagh Universal Spring 2 fixed functional appliance on class II/1 patients at their postpubertal-peak growth period compared with the extraction method

Cited by 9 publications

References 30 publications

Three-dimensional evaluation of the efficacy of Powerscope appliance in treatment of skeletal Class 2 malocclusion: A prospective clinical study

Three-dimensional evaluation of the efficacy of Powerscope appliance in treatment of skeletal Class 2 malocclusion: A prospective clinical study

The evaluation and clinical efficiency of PowerScope: An original research

Extraction vs. Nonextraction on Soft-Tissue Profile Change in Patients with Malocclusion: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About