Perception of changes in soft-tissue profile after Herbst appliance treatment of Class II Division 1 malocclusion

Rêgo, Marcus Vinícius Neiva Nunes do; Martinez, Elizabeth Ferreira; Coelho, Rogério Menezes Ibiapina; Leal, Leanne Matias Portela; Thiesen, Guilherme

doi:10.1016/j.ajodo.2016.08.028

Cited by 21 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The results are also in accordance with two studies [20,37] that investigated the perception of facial attractiveness assessed by orthodontists, general pratictioners and laypersons after Herbst appliance treatment. Another study [38] reported no significant improvement in perceived facial changes after Class II treatment with functional appliances and fixed therapy, but the patients were not treated with the Herbst appliance.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Evaluation of Profile Changes in Class II Individuals Treated by Means of Herbst Miniscope Appliance

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: To evaluate the profile changes following orthopedic/orthodontic treatment with the Herbst Miniscope® appliance in subjects affected with Class II malocclusion with mandibular retrusion. Methods: A total of 44 patients presenting a skeletal Angle Class II malocclusion (ANB > 4°) due to mandibular retrusion and a cervical maturation stage between CS2 and CS3 were included in the study. Of these 44 patients, 22 (mean age 11.9 ± 1.3, HBT group) were treated using the Herbst appliance, while 22 (mean age 10.6 ± 1.3, CTR group) were followed for a 12-month observational period. A cephalometric tracing was performed at the beginning of treatment (T0) and after 12 months (T1). Results: In both groups there was a significant advancement of soft tissue pogonion (HBT = 3.5 ± 3.0 mm, p < 0.001; CTR = 2.2 ± 2.9 mm, p < 0.001), but the difference between the two groups was not significant (p = 0.172). On the contrary, both groups had a significant advancement of the mandibular sulcus (HBT = 3.7 ± 2.8 mm, p < 0.001; CTR = 1.2 ± 2.2 mm, p < 0.001) and a lower lip protrusion (HBT = 3.45 ± 2.51 mm, p < 0.001; CTR = 1.7 ± 2.7 mm, p = 0.008), but in both cases the HBT group showed a statistically significant greater increase in sulcus protrusion (p = 0.002) and lower lip protrusion (p = 0.029) than controls. There were no statistically significant effects on the upper jaw. Conclusions: The Herbst appliance advanced the lower jaw soft tissues.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Evaluation of Profile Changes in Class II Individuals Treated by Means of Herbst Miniscope Appliance

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Likewise, Rego et al 29 reported that lay individuals quantified soft tissue changes as greater after treatment with the Herbst appliance. However, in the present study, the results presented in Table 4 reveal a significant difference between the examiners (p = 0.003), in that the orthodontists were more permissive in their evaluation, by assigning greater scores to the pleasantness of facial profile.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…23,24,26,28 Just like the extraction group, treatment with the Forsus appliance also produced positive changes in the facial profile; however, both groups of evaluators assigned greater scores to the Forsus appliance at posttreatment (Table 3), thus corroborating other studies that used fixed functional appliances to achieve an improvement in the facial profile. 4,21,29 Even though the protocols for both extraction and Forsus achieved favorable results, the observation between lay individuals and orthodontists was different concerning the facial impact, in that the impact was more perceptible to orthodontists. Other studies 21,22,29 also observed differences in the opinion of lay individuals and orthodontists.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…4,21,29 Even though the protocols for both extraction and Forsus achieved favorable results, the observation between lay individuals and orthodontists was different concerning the facial impact, in that the impact was more perceptible to orthodontists. Other studies 21,22,29 also observed differences in the opinion of lay individuals and orthodontists.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

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

“…So for patients with chin deficiency, they may elect genioplasty surgery after 18 years of age. Then the soft tissue profile can be more perfect (Kim et al, 2017;Rego et al, 2017).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Morphological Characteristics of Soft Tissue Profile of Angle’s Class II Division I Malocclusion before and after Orthodontic Treatment

Xuan¹,

Li²,

Li³

et al. 2018

Int. J. Morphol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SUMMARY:By analysing cephalometrics before and after the treatment of Angle's class II division 1 malocclusion, soft tissue profile changes were observed, and to explore whether there was a correlation between the change of posterior occlusal plane (OP-P) and soft tissue profile. The study aimed to provide a theoretical reference in the clinical diagnosis and orthodontic treatment of early permanent dentition of Angle class II division 1 malocclusion patients. We randomly selected 20 cases of orthodontics in Shanxi Medical University orthodontics patients (aged 12-18 years) of the lateral cephalograms, Winceph 8.0 software was used to measure the posterior occlusal plane (OP-P), TUL-EP , TLL-EP, nasolabial angle, upper lip base thickness, upper lip tension, lower lip H line distance, chin soft tissue thickness and Z angle. And SPSS 22.0 software was used to analyze the correlation between OP-P and other measurement indexes. The change of posterior occlusal plane was positively related to the distance from upper lip to the esthetic plane, the distance from lower lip to the esthetic plane, the tension of the upper lip and distance from lower lip to H line, and the change of posterior occlusal plane was negatively related to nasolabial angle and Z angle. The change of posterior occlusal plane had no significant correlation with upper lip base thickness and soft tissue chin thickness. The change of posterior occlusal plane has an important guiding significance for orthodontic treatment,by focusing on the change of the posterior occlusal plane to achieve the purpose of changing the soft tissue profile.

show abstract

Perception of changes in soft-tissue profile after Herbst appliance treatment of Class II Division 1 malocclusion

Cited by 21 publications

References 25 publications

Evaluation of Profile Changes in Class II Individuals Treated by Means of Herbst Miniscope Appliance

Evaluation of Profile Changes in Class II Individuals Treated by Means of Herbst Miniscope Appliance

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

Morphological Characteristics of Soft Tissue Profile of Angle’s Class II Division I Malocclusion before and after Orthodontic Treatment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Perception of changes in soft-tissue profile after Herbst appliance treatment of Class II Division 1 malocclusion

Cited by 21 publications

References 25 publications

Evaluation of Profile Changes in Class II Individuals Treated by Means of Herbst Miniscope Appliance

Evaluation of Profile Changes in Class II Individuals Treated by Means of Herbst Miniscope Appliance

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

Morphological Characteristics of Soft Tissue Profile of Angle&#8217;s Class II Division I Malocclusion before and after Orthodontic Treatment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Morphological Characteristics of Soft Tissue Profile of Angle’s Class II Division I Malocclusion before and after Orthodontic Treatment