Stability of Class II treatment with an edgewise crowned Herbst appliance in the early mixed dentition: Skeletal and dental changes
- PMID: 21803259
- DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2010.02.036
Stability of Class II treatment with an edgewise crowned Herbst appliance in the early mixed dentition: Skeletal and dental changes
Abstract
Introduction: The objectives of this research were to assess skeletal and dental changes in patients with Class II malocclusion treated with the edgewise crowned Herbst appliance in the early mixed dentition and to measure the stability of treatment after a second phase of fixed appliance therapy.
Methods: Twenty-two patients (ages, 8.4 ± 1.0 years) with Class II Division 1 malocclusion treated consecutively with the edgewise crowned Herbst appliance in the early mixed dentition were studied. Lateral cephalograms were taken before Herbst treatment, immediately after Herbst treatment, and after a second phase of fixed appliance therapy. The results were compared with a control group of untreated Class II subjects selected from the Bolton-Brush study, matched by age, sex, and craniofacial morphology. A total of 37 sagittal, vertical, and angular cephalometric variables were evaluated. Changes in overjet and molar relationship were calculated. Changes due to growth were subtracted to obtain the net changes due to treatment. The data were analyzed by using analysis of variance (ANOVA) and the t tests.
Results: Overcorrection with the Herbst appliance resulted in an average reduction in overjet of 7.0 mm and a change in molar relationship of 6.6 mm. Several factors contributed to the change in overjet: restraint of the forward movement of the maxilla (0.4 mm), forward movement of the mandible (2.0 mm), backward movement of the maxillary incisors (3.7 mm), and forward movement of the mandibular incisors (0.9 mm). Skeletal changes together with a 3.1-mm backward movement of the maxillary molars and a 1.1-mm forward movement of the mandibular molars contributed to the changes in molar relationship. After the second phase of fixed appliance therapy, the change in overjet was reduced to 2.8 mm. Most of the remaining overjet corrections were contributed by the restraint of maxillary growth (2.8 mm). The mandible moved posteriorly by 1.6 mm, and the mandibular incisors moved forward by 0.2 mm. Change in molar relationship was reduced to 2.2 mm. The maxillary molars moved backward by 0.2 mm, and the mandibular molars moved forward by 0.8 mm.
Conclusions: Overcorrection of Class II malocclusion with the edgewise crowned Herbst appliance in the early mixed dentition resulted in a significant reduction in overjet and correction of the molar relationship. A portion of the correction was maintained after a second phase of fixed appliance therapy because of the continuous restraint of maxillary growth and the dentoalveolar adaptations.
Copyright © 2011 American Association of Orthodontists. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.
Similar articles
-
Treatment effects of the edgewise Herbst appliance: a cephalometric and tomographic investigation.Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2006 Nov;130(5):582-93. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2005.01.030. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2006. PMID: 17110255
-
Cephalometric study of Class II Division 1 patients treated with an extended-duration, reinforced, banded Herbst appliance followed by fixed appliances.Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2016 Nov;150(5):818-830. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2016.04.020. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2016. PMID: 27871709
-
Short-term treatment effects produced by the Herbst appliance in the mixed dentition.Angle Orthod. 2005 Jul;75(4):540-7. doi: 10.1043/0003-3219(2005)75[540:STEPBT]2.0.CO;2. Angle Orthod. 2005. PMID: 16097222 Clinical Trial.
-
Mandibular propulsion appliance for adults with Class II malocclusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Eur J Orthod. 2020 Apr 1;42(2):163-173. doi: 10.1093/ejo/cjz089. Eur J Orthod. 2020. PMID: 31786599
-
The extraction of permanent second molars and its effect on the dentofacial complex of patients treated with the Tip-Edge appliance.Eur J Orthod. 2002 Oct;24(5):501-18. doi: 10.1093/ejo/24.5.501. Eur J Orthod. 2002. PMID: 12407946 Review.
Cited by
-
Comparison between Herbst appliances with or without miniscrew anchorage.Dent Res J (Isfahan). 2012 Dec;9(Suppl 2):S216-21. doi: 10.4103/1735-3327.109762. Dent Res J (Isfahan). 2012. PMID: 23814587 Free PMC article.
-
Assessment of the condylar response of two differently anchored fixed functional appliances in class II malocclusion in young adult orthodontic patients: A randomized clinical trial.J Orthod Sci. 2024 Feb 16;13:3. doi: 10.4103/jos.jos_112_23. eCollection 2024. J Orthod Sci. 2024. PMID: 38516116 Free PMC article.
-
The effectiveness of the Herbst appliance for patients with Class II malocclusion: a meta-analysis.Eur J Orthod. 2016 Jun;38(3):324-33. doi: 10.1093/ejo/cjv057. Epub 2015 Aug 25. Eur J Orthod. 2016. PMID: 26306822 Free PMC article.
-
Dentoskeletal effects of the cast-splint Herbst, twin-block, and twin-force bite corrector devices used to correct class II malocclusion : Three-year follow-up.J Orofac Orthop. 2025 Jun 11. doi: 10.1007/s00056-025-00591-0. Online ahead of print. J Orofac Orthop. 2025. PMID: 40498107 English.
-
An evaluation of dentofacial changes in Angle's class II division 1 patients using AdvanSync 2.J Orthod Sci. 2023 Mar 18;12:17. doi: 10.4103/jos.jos_44_22. eCollection 2023. J Orthod Sci. 2023. PMID: 37351416 Free PMC article.
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources