Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2007 Apr;131(4):447.e21-30.
doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.04.029.

Dentoskeletal and soft-tissue changes with cervical headgear and mandibular protraction appliance therapy in the treatment of Class II malocclusions

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Dentoskeletal and soft-tissue changes with cervical headgear and mandibular protraction appliance therapy in the treatment of Class II malocclusions

Danilo Furquim Siqueira et al. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2007 Apr.

Abstract

Introduction: In this study, we cephalometrically compared changes in the dentoskeletal and soft tissues after orthodontic treatment of Class II Division 1 malocclusions between the cervical headgear (CHG) and the mandibular protraction appliance (MPA) followed by fixed appliances.

Methods: The sample consisted of 50 patients divided into 2 groups of 25 patients each (13 male, 12 female). Group 1 patients were treated with CHG and fixed appliance, and group 2 patients were treated with the MPA and fixed appliances. The patients were matched according to sex, age, treatment time, and initial cephalometric variables. The groups were compared regarding pretreatment stage and treatment changes, with t tests, at P <.05.

Results: The CHG group showed statistically greater restriction of the anterior displacement of the maxilla, improvement of the skeletal Class II relationship, decreased facial convexity, extrusion and distalization of the maxillary first molar, and extrusion of the mandibular incisors. The MPA group had statistically greater increases in maxillary length, mandibular protrusion, maxillary incisor retrusion, mesial displacement of the mandibular first molars, and protrusion of the lower lip.

Conclusions: The changes in Class II malocclusion correction between the CHG and the MPA were that the CHG corrected the Class II malocclusion primarily through greater action on the maxillary skeletal and dentoalveolar structures as compared with the MPA, which corrected the malocclusion through greater action on the mandibular dentoalveolar structures.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources