Twin-block and mandibular anterior repositioning appliances effects in Class II malocclusion correction

Bastiani, Cristina; Bellini-Pereira, Silvio Augusto; Castillo, Aron Aliaga–Del; Chiqueto, Kelly; Henriques, José Fernando Castanha; Janson, Guilherme

doi:10.1016/j.ajodo.2021.09.021

Cited by 6 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our study revealed a notable increase in the protrusion of the lower lip among the TB group, and this change was also significant when comparing the CMA group to the TB group, as shown in Tables 4 and 5. This change can be attributed to the skeletal and dental influences observed in the TB group, aligning with previous research findings in the literature [30].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Evaluating the Effects of Carriere Motion Appliance and Twin Block Appliances in Class II Correction—A Retrospective Study

Har Zion,

Katzhendler,

Bader Farraj

et al. 2024

Dentistry Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This retrospective study compared Class II orthodontic non-extraction treatment using Carriere Motion Appliance (CMA) and Twin Block (TB) appliances. Methods: The treatment of 38 patients was assessed. Pre- and post-treatment cephalometric radiographs were analyzed to evaluate skeletal, dental, and soft tissue treatment outcomes and efficacy. Results: Both appliances effectively corrected the Class II molar relationship. When measured at the distal aspect of the first molar, TB achieved 4.22 mm, while CMA had a 2.55 mm correction. When measured in the mesial aspect, the CMA achieved a 3.9 mm correction. The changes in SNB and ANB were statistically significant only in the TB group. The CMA appliance demonstrated statistically significantly less protrusion of the mandibular incisors and less upper incisor retrusion without vertical changes compared to the TB appliance. The TB demonstrated statistically significant lower lip protrusion compared to the CMA. Conclusion: The CMA corrects Class II malocclusions only by exerting a dentoalveolar influence and does not demonstrate the added effects associated with TB, such as elongation of lower facial height (LFH) and less loss of lower anchorage. Nonetheless, the correction in the TB group comprised both dentoalveolar and skeletal components. The CMA promotes a multidirectional upper and lower molar movement, and despite our 2D cephalometric analysis, we were able to estimate the extent of upper molar derotation.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Evaluating the Effects of Carriere Motion Appliance and Twin Block Appliances in Class II Correction—A Retrospective Study

Har Zion,

Katzhendler,

Bader Farraj

et al. 2024

Dentistry Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…All of these FFA could successfully achieve class II correction even though patient discomfort and difficulties in daily clinic management may reduce their use. Removable functional appliances (RFA) have an extensive literature background with many advantages for the patient and few side effects; compliance remains the greatest problem with RFA that can ultimately lead to unfavorable results [34][35][36][37][38][39].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effects of Removable Functional Appliances on the Dentoalveolar Unit in Growing Patients

Cardarelli,

Drago,

Rizzi

et al. 2024

Medicina

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and Objectives: The objective of this retrospective controlled study is to compare class II growing patients who underwent treatment with two different functional appliances: the Fraenkel regulator (FR-2), utilized as the control group, and the elastodontic device “Cranium Occluded Postural Multifunctional Harmonizers” (AMCOP), utilized as the test group. Materials and Methods: The study sample consisted of 52 patients with class II division I malocclusion (30 males, 22 females, mean age 8.6 ± 1.4 years) who were treated with the two different types of appliances: Group 1 (n = 27, mean age 8 [7.00, 9.00] years, 12 females, 15 males) received treatment with AMCOP, while Group 2 (n = 25, mean age 9.2 years [8.20, 10.00], 10 females, 15 males) received treatment with FR-2. The mean treatment duration for Group 1 was 28.00 [21.50, 38.00] months, while for Group 2 it was 23.70 [17.80, 27.40] months. Cephalometric analyses were performed on lateral cephalograms taken before treatment (T1) and after treatment (T2). Results: Significant intragroup differences were observed over time in Group 1 for 1^/PP. Similarly, significant intragroup differences were observed over time in Group 2 for SNB, ANB, and IMPA. Conclusions: Both treatment modalities resulted in the correction of class II malocclusion with dentoalveolar compensation, although the treatment duration with AMCOP tended to be longer on average.

show abstract

“…Patients in the TB group were treated with a modified TB appliance, 27,28 which was constructed following the original design of Clark. 29 The TB appliance is a removable functional appliance, comprising two bite-blocks on premolars.…”

Section: Appliance Manufacturingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of modified clear Twin Block aligner in treating adolescents with skeletal class II malocclusion: A two‐centre cephalometric study

Feng,

Jiang,

Wang

et al. 2024

Orthod Craniofacial Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionThe purpose of this study was to evaluate the therapeutic effect of modified clear Twin Block (CTB) aligner and traditional twin block (TB) appliance from skeletal, dentoalveolar and soft tissue changes in adolescents with skeletal class II malocclusion.MethodsA total of 80 adolescents, included in this study from two medical centres, were distributed into CTB group, TB group and control group based on the treatment they received. Lateral cephalograms at pre‐treatment (T1) and post‐treatment (T2) were measured by modified Pancherz's cephalometric analysis, and dentoskeletal and soft tissue changes were analysed by independent‐sample t‐test, paired‐sample t‐test, ANOVA test and Scheffe's Post Hoc test.ResultsSeventy‐five adolescents completed the study, including 32 in the CTB group, 32 in the TB group and 11 in the control group. Both CTB and TB treatment showed significant differences in most dentoskeletal and soft tissue measurements. Compared with the control group, improvements were observed in class II molar relationship through significant different in S Vert/Ms‐S Vert/Mi in the CTB group (P < .01) and the TB group (P < .001), as well as deep overjet through significant different in S Vert/Is‐S Vert/Ii in the CTB group (P < .001) and the TB group (P < .001). Besides, the CTB group also showed less protrusion of lower incisors and resulted in a more significant improvement in profile with fewer adverse effects on speaking, eating and social activities.ConclusionsFor adolescents with skeletal class II malocclusion, CTB appliance was as effective as TB on improving dentoskeletal and soft tissue measurements, featuring more reliable teeth control and patient acceptance.

show abstract

Twin-block and mandibular anterior repositioning appliances effects in Class II malocclusion correction

Cited by 6 publications

References 31 publications

Evaluating the Effects of Carriere Motion Appliance and Twin Block Appliances in Class II Correction—A Retrospective Study

Evaluating the Effects of Carriere Motion Appliance and Twin Block Appliances in Class II Correction—A Retrospective Study

Effects of Removable Functional Appliances on the Dentoalveolar Unit in Growing Patients

Evaluation of modified clear Twin Block aligner in treating adolescents with skeletal class II malocclusion: A two‐centre cephalometric study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About