The Comparison of Class II Malocclusion Treatment Outcomes between Maxillary Premolars Extraction and Functional Appliance Associated with Fixed Appliance
Bahro, Rand |
Recenzentas / Reviewer | |
Konsultantas / Consultant | |
Konsultantas / Consultant | |
Konsultantas / Consultant | |
Konsultantas / Consultant | |
Konsultantas / Consultant | |
Konsultantas / Consultant | |
Konsultantas / Consultant | |
Komisijos pirmininkas / Committee Chairman | |
Komisijos narys / Committee Member | |
Komisijos narys / Committee Member | |
Komisijos narys / Committee Member | |
Komisijos narys / Committee Member | |
Komisijos narys / Committee Member |
Relevance and Aim: Various methods are available for Class II malocclusion treatment but they might have different effects on the craniofacial structures. Aim is to compare skeletal, dental, and soft tissue outcomes of maxillary premolars extraction (PE) treatment and functional appliance associated with fixed appliance (FAF) treatment in Class II patients by evaluating results of cephalometric analysis.
Materials and Methods: Electronic search was conducted in PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Science Direct databases up to January 2021 using the keywords "Class II malocclusion", "functional appliance", "premolar extraction", "cephalometric". Randomized controlled trials, prospective and retrospective studies including adolescents with skeletal Class II malocclusion, retruded mandible and increased overjet and reporting cephalometric changes after PE or FAF treatments published within 10 years were included.
Results: After examining 953 article abstracts, full text of 63 articles was read and assessed for eligibility. Four studies that fulfilled the inclusion criteria were included in the review. Studies reported approximately similar effects and ranges of change in skeletal, soft tissue, and most dental cephalometric variables after both treatments, but changes in 1-NA°(PE: -0.36°(SD 7.82) to -2.47°; FAF: -1.66°(SD 9.75) to -6.88°(SD 4.15)), and 1-NB°(PE: 2°(SD 5.13) to 3.5°; FAF: 5.13°(SD 8.65) to 6.07°(SD 4.86)) and IMPA were more pronounced in functional appliances associated with fixed appliance treatment.
Conclusion: There is no clinically significant difference between skeletal and soft tissue outcomes of both treatment methods. However, functional appliance associated with fixed appliance caused more maxillary incisors retroclination and mandibular incisors proclination than maxillary premolars extraction treatment.
Tikslas: palyginti skeletinius, dantų ir minkštųjų audinių cefalometrinius pokyčius pacientams su Angle II klasės sąkandžio anomalijomis taikant ekstrakcinį ir neekstrakcinį gydymą nenuimamais ortodontiniais aparatais su fiksuotais funkciniais aparatais.
Uždaviniai:
-
Palyginti skeletinius cefalometrinius pokyčius pacientams su Angle II klasės sąkandžio anomalijomis taikant ekstrakcinį ir neekstrakcinį gydymą nenuimamais ortodontiniais aparatais su fiksuotais funkciniais aparatais.
-
Palyginti dantų cefalometrinius pokyčius pacientams su Angle II klasės sąkandžio anomalijomis taikant ekstrakcinį ir neekstrakcinį gydymą nenuimamais ortodontiniais aparatais su fiksuotais funkciniais aparatais.
-
Palyginti minkštųjų audinių cefalometrinius pokyčius pacientams su Angle II klasės sąkandžio anomalijomis taikant ekstrakcinį ir neekstrakcinį gydymą nenuimamais ortodontiniais aparatais su fiksuotais funkciniais aparatais.