Functional Appliances in the Treatment of Class II Malocclusions

Year 2018, Volume: 9 Issue: 1, 1581 - 1592, 01.01.2018

Sinem İnce Bingöl Burçak Kaya

Abstract

Class II malocclusion is one of the most frequently discussed malocclusions in orthodontic literature. Many types of functional appliances have been used for treatment of Class II malocclusions related to mandibular retrognathia. In this review, it is aimed to evaluate the properties, working principles, effects and side effects of functional appliances recently used in the treatment of Class II malocclusions caused by mandibular retrognathia

Keywords

mandibular retrognathia, orthodontic appliances, functional, malocclusion, Angle Class III

Sınıf II Malokluzyonların Tedavisinde Fonksiyonel Apareylerin Yeri

Abstract

Sınıf II malokluzyon, ortodonti literatüründe en sık tartışılan malokluzyonlardan biridir. Mandibuler retrognatiye bağlı Sınıf II malokluzyonların tedavisinde ideal sonuçları elde etmek için çok çeşitli fonksiyonel apareyler kullanılmıştır. Bu derlemede mandibuler retrognatiye bağlı Sınıf II malokluzyonların tedavisinde kullanılan fonksiyonel apareylerin özellikleri, çalışma prensipleri, etkileri ve yan etkilerinin güncellenerek değerlendirilmesi hedeflenmiştir

Keywords

retrognati, ortodontik aletler, fonksiyonel, maloklüzyon, Angle sınıf 3

References

• Proffit WR, Fields HW, Sarver D. Contemporary Orthodontics, Mosby, 2007.
• Graber LW, Vanarsdall RL Jr, Vig KWL. Orthodontics, 5th Edition Current Principles and Techniques. Mosby, 2011.
• Koretsi V, Zymperdikas VF, Papageorgiou SN, Papadopoulos MA. Treatment effects of removable functional appliances in patients with Class II malocclusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Orthod. 2015;37:418-34.
• Shen G, Hägg U, Darendeliler MA. Skeletal effects of bite jumping therapy on the mandible – removable vs. fixed functional appliances. Orthod Craniofac Res. 2005;8:2-10.
• Mills JR. The effect of functional appliances on the skeletal pattern. Br J Orthod. 1991;18:267- 75.
• Rakosi T. The activator. In: Graber TM, Rakosi T, Petrovic AG, editors. Dentofacial Orthopedics with Functional Appliances, 2nd edn. St Louis: Mosby; 1997. p: 161-213.
• Proffit WR, Fields HW Jr, Moray LJ. Prevalence of malocclusion and orthodontic treatment need in the United States: estimates from N-HANES III survey. Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg. 1998;13:97-106.
• Du X, Hägg U, Rabie AB. Effects of headgear Herbst and mandibular step-by-step advancement versus conventional Herbst appliance and maximal jumping of the mandible. Eur J Orthod. 2002;24:167-74.
• Balters W. Ergebnis der gesteuerten Selbstheilung von kieferorthopädischen anomalien. Dtsch Zahnärztl. 1960;15:241-8.
• Büyüknacar Ö. Sabit Fonksiyonel Apareyler. Ege Üniversitesi Ortod. 2013.
• McNamara JA Jr, Huge SA. The Fränkel Appliance (FR-2): Model preparation and appliance construction. Am J Orthod. 1981;80:478-95.
• Clark WJ. Twin Block Functional Theraphy Applications in Dentofacial Orthopaedics. 2nd Edition. Mosby, 2002.
• Bishara SE, Textbook of Orthodontics. Saunders Company, 2001.
• Pacha MM, Fleming PS, Johal A. A comparison of the efficacy of fixed versus removable functional appliances in children with Class II malocclusion: A systematic review. Eur J Orthod. 2016;38:621- 30.
• Velentza MF. Three Dimensional Assesment of Condyle and Glenoid Fossa Changes after Treatment with the Twin-block and Herbst Appliances. Marmara University, 2014.
• Rogers MB. Herbst appliance variations. J Clin Orthod. 2003;37:156-9.
• Smith JR. Matching the Herbst to the malocclusion. Clin Impressions. 1998;7:6-12, 20-23.
• Pancherz H. The effects, limitations, and long- term dentofacial adaptations to treatment with the Herbst appliance. Semin Orthod. 1997;3:232- 43.
• Siara-Olds NJ, Pangrazio-Kulbersh V, Berger J, Bayirli B. Long-term dentoskeletal changes with the Bionator, Herbst, Twin Block, and MARA functional appliances. Angle Orthod. 2010;80:18-29.
• Ruf S, Pancherz H. The mechanism of Class II correction during Herbst therapy in relation to the vertical jaw base relationship: a cephalometric roentgenographic 1997;67:271-6. Angle Orthod. 21. Coelho FCM. Mandibular protraction appliances for Class II treatment. J Clin Orthod. 1995;29:319-36.
• Calvez X. The universal bite jumper. J Clin Orthod. 1998;32:493-500.
• Ritto AK. The ritto appliance - a new fixed functional device. Orthodontic CyberJournal. 1999;6:1-20.
• Kinzinger G, Ostheimer J, Förster F, Kwandt PB, Reul H, Diedrich P. Development of a new fixed functional appliance for treatment of skeletal Class II malocclusion first report. J Orofac Orthop. 2002;63:384-99.
• Cope JB, Buschgang PH, Cope DD, Parker J, Blackwood HO 3rd. Quantitative evaluation of craniofacial changes with Jasper Jumper theraphy. Angle Orthod. 1994; 64:113-22.
• West RP. The adjustable bite corrector. J Clin Orthod. 1995;29:650-7.
• Taner T, El H. Sınıf II Maloklüzyonun Düzeltiminde Bite-fixer Apareyinin Kullanımı: 2 Olgu Sunumu. Hacettepe 2006;30:72-82. Fakültesi Derg.
• Karacay S, Akin E, Olmez H, Gurton AU, Sagdic D. Forsus Nitinol Flat Spring and Jasper Jumper corrections of Class II division 1 malocclusions. Angle Orthod 2006;76:666-72.
• Stromeyer EL, Caruso JM, DeVincenzo JP. A cephalometric study of the Class II correction effects of the Eureka Spring. Angle Orthod. 2002;72:203-10.
• Chhibber A, Nanda R, Uribe F. The Twin Force Bite Corrector and skeletal anchorage for Class II correction. In: Papadopoulos MA. Skeletal Anchorage in Orthodontic Treatment of Class II Malocclusion. Mosby, 2015, p:249-252
• Franchi L, Alvetro L, Giuntini V, Masucci C, Defraia E, Baccetti T. Effectiveness of comprehensive fixed appliance treatment used with the Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device in Class II patients. Angle Orthod. 2011;81:678-83.
• Bilgic F, Basaran G, Hamamci O. Comparison of Forsus FRD EZ and Andresen activator in the treatment of class II, division 1 malocclusions. Clin Oral Invest. 2015;19:445-51.
• Jones G, Buschang PH, Kim KB, Oliver DR. Class II non-extraction patients treated with the Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device versus intermaxillary elastics. Angle Orthod. 2008;78:332-8.
• Zymperdikas VF, Koretsi V, Papageorgiou SN, Papadopoulos MA. Treatment effects of fixed functional appliances in patients with Class II malocclusion: a systematic review and meta- analysis. Eur J Orthod. 2016;38:113-26.
• Panigrahi P, Vineeth V. Biomechanical effects of fixed functional appliance on craniofacial structures. Angle Orthod. 2009;79:668-75.
• Marsico E, Gatto E, Burrascano M, Matarese G, Cordasco G. Effectiveness of orthodontic treatment with functional appliances on mandibular growth in the short term. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2011;139:24-36.
• Aras A, Ada E, Saracoglu H, Gezer NS, Aras I. Comparison of treatments with the Forsus fatigue resistant device in relation to skeletal maturity: A cephalometric and magnetic resonance imaging study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2011;140:616-25.
• Arici S, Akan H, Yakubov K, Arici N. Effects of fixed functional appliance treatment on the temporomandibular joint. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2008;133:809-14.
• Kinzinger GS, Roth A, Gülden N, Bücker A, Diedrich PR. Effects of orthodontic treatment with fixed functional orthopaedic appliances on the condyle-fossa relationship in the temporomandibular joint: a magnetic resonance imaging study (Part I) Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2006;35:339-46.
• Ruf S, Pancherz H. Temporomandibular joint remodeling in adolescents and young adults during Herbst treatment: A prospective longitudinal magnetic resonance imaging and cephalometric radiographic investigation. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1999;115:607-18.
• Voudouris JC, Woodside DG, Altuna G, Angelopoulos G, Bourque PJ, Lacouture CY, Kuftinec MM. Condyle-fossa modifications and muscle interactions during Herbst treatment, Part 2. Results and conclusions. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2003;124:13-29.
• Voudouris JC, Kuftinec MM. Improved clinical use of Twin-block and Herbst as a result of radiating viscoelastic tissue forces on the condyle and fossa in treatment and long-term retention: Growth relativity. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2000;117:247-66.
• Özbek MM, Memikoğlu TU, Gögen H, Lowe AA, Baspinar E. Oropharyngeal airway dimensions and functional-orthopedic treatment in skeletal Class II cases. Angle Orthod 1998;68:327-36.
• Iwasaki T, Takemoto Y, Inada E, Sato H, Saitoh I, Kakuno E, Kanomi R, Yamasaki Y. Three- dimensional cone-beam computed tomography analysis of enlargement of the pharyngeal airway by the Herbst appliance. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2014;146:776-85.
• Pancherz H. The nature of Class II relapse after Herbst appliance treatment: a cephalometric long-term investigation. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1991;100:220-33.
• Dr. Sinem İnce Bingöl
• Başkent Üniversitesi Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi Ortodonti AD
• Cad No: 107 06490 Bahçelievler/Ankara
• Tel: [phone] • Faks: 0312 203 00 26 • e-posta: [e-mail]