Fixed functional appliances with multibracket appliances have no skeletal effect on the mandible: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Ishaq, Ramy Abdul Rahman; Alhammadi, Maged Sultan; Fayed, Mona M. Salah; Elezz, Amr Abou; Mostafa, Yehya A.

doi:10.1016/j.ajodo.2015.11.023

Cited by 38 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It could be due to the direct application of the orthopedic force on the bone that transmitted a downward and forward force vector to the condyles. The FFRD group results are in agreement with the most recent systematic reviews that mentioned that FFAs could not induce skeletal changes 41,42 . The inclusion of the control group was the reason for the discrepancy between our results and those of Turk kahraman et al 25 who mentioned that the FFRD alone and FFRD miniplates were able to induce lengthening of the mandible.…”

Section: Main Findings In the Context Of The Existing Evidence Intersupporting

confidence: 89%

Buccal bone graft with surgically assisted rapid maxillary expansion in young adults: a cone beam computerized tomographic study

Agniah

Bedwehi

Al-khalifa

et al. 2018

Egyptian Orthodontic Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Main Findings In the Context Of The Existing Evidence Intersupporting

confidence: 89%

Buccal bone graft with surgically assisted rapid maxillary expansion in young adults: a cone beam computerized tomographic study

Agniah

Bedwehi

Al-khalifa

et al. 2018

Egyptian Orthodontic Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This confirmed the evidence that FFAs could not induce additional skeletal changes. 3,4 On the contrary, miniplate-anchored FFRD (FMP) showed an increase of 4.05 mm in the Co-Gn measurement, which could have been due to the direct application of orthopedic forces to the bone that transmitted a downward and forward force vector to the condyles. Annualizing the data did not change this fact, so the difference was not due to the duration discrepancy between groups.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Recently, evidence 3,4 concluded that the skeletal effects of FFAs were minimal and of negligible clinical importance. Reduced skeletal correction was associated with the anchorage loss caused by these appliances that could also jeopardize the stability of the results.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of the miniplate-anchored Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device in skeletal Class II growing subjects: A randomized controlled trial

Elkordy

Abouelezz

Fayed

et al. 2018

The Angle Orthodontist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: To evaluate the use of direct miniplate anchorage in conjunction with the Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device (FFRD) in treatment of skeletal Class II malocclusion. Materials and Methods: Forty-eight females with skeletal Class II were randomly allocated to the Forsus plus miniplates (FMP) group (16 patients, age 12.5 ± 0.9 years), Forsus alone (FFRD; 16 patients, age 12.1 ± 0.9 years), or the untreated control group (16 subjects, age 12.1 ± 0.9 years). After leveling and alignment, miniplates were inserted in the mandibular symphysis in the FMP group. The FFRD was inserted directly on the miniplates in the FMP group and onto the mandibular archwires in the FFRD group. The appliances were removed after reaching an edge-to-edge incisor relationship. Results: Data from 46 subjects were analyzed. The effective mandibular length significantly increased in the FMP group only (4.05 ± 0.78). The mandibular incisors showed a significant proclination in the FFRD group (9.17 ± 2.42) and a nonsignificant retroclination in the FMP group (−1.49 ± 4.70). The failure rate of the miniplates was reported to be 13.3%. Conclusions: The use of miniplates with the FFRD was successful in increasing the effective mandibular length in Class II malocclusion subjects in the short term. The miniplate-anchored FFRD eliminated the unfavorable mandibular incisor proclination in contrast to the conventional FFRD.

show abstract

“…However, removable functional appliances are mostly used during the early and late mixed dentition period at the ages of 8-13 years depending on the child's development, whereas the fixed functional appliances are used at the ages of 11-16 years (9,24,25). Therefore, the possible effects of the relatively wide age range were ignored in order to make a realistic comparison.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Patients’ and Parents’ Perception of Functional Appliances: A Survey Study

Lena

Bozkurt²,

Yetkiner

2017

Turk J Orthod

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To evaluate patients' and parents' perception of removable, fixed rigid, and fixed hybrid functional appliances and to compare their impacts on anxiety and discomfort during treatment in different age groups and genders.Methods: Data were gathered by means of a questionnaire that included items presumed to be associated with orthodontic compliance. A self-administered questionnaire was used to quantify patients' and parents' perceptions. Three groups were formed regarding the type of functional appliance used: fixed rigid (Functional Mandibular Advancer, FMA), fixed hybrid (Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device, FRD), and removable (Twin Block, TB). Two separate questionnaires were used for the patients and their parents comprising the necessary context. Chi-square, Mann-Whitney U, and Kruskal-Wallis tests were used for data analysis. Results:Patients needed less time to adapt to the FRD appliance. Eating difficulties were encountered by patients in the FMA group. Adolescents who had completed functional orthodontic treatment with a removable appliance had difficulties in controlling their saliva. Patients' and parents' perceptions were found to be in accordance with each other. Conclusion:Adolescents who had completed functional orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances had more difficulty in their daily life. Orthodontists should be aware of this impact caused by functional orthodontic treatment and should regularly encourage patients by reminding them of the improvements to be had by fixing the malocclusion.

show abstract

Fixed functional appliances with multibracket appliances have no skeletal effect on the mandible: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Cited by 38 publications

References 22 publications

Buccal bone graft with surgically assisted rapid maxillary expansion in young adults: a cone beam computerized tomographic study

Buccal bone graft with surgically assisted rapid maxillary expansion in young adults: a cone beam computerized tomographic study

Evaluation of the miniplate-anchored Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device in skeletal Class II growing subjects: A randomized controlled trial

Patients’ and Parents’ Perception of Functional Appliances: A Survey Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About