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
. 2013 Jul;83(4):718-27.
doi: 10.2319/090412-709.1. Epub 2012 Nov 29.

Mechanism of Class II correction in prepubertal and postpubertal patients with Twin Force Bite Corrector

Aditya Chhibber  1 , Madhur Upadhyay, Flavio Uribe, Ravindra Nanda
Affiliations
Comparative Study

Mechanism of Class II correction in prepubertal and postpubertal patients with Twin Force Bite Corrector

Aditya Chhibber et al. Angle Orthod. 2013 Jul.

Abstract

Objective: To compare the dentoskeletal effects and treatment efficiency of the Twin Force Bite Corrector (TFBC) appliance in Class II correction of patients treated before or after the pubertal growth spurt.

Materials and methods: Forty-one normodivergent Class II patients treated with the TFBC appliance were divided into two groups based on their cervical vertebral maturation stage (CVMS). Group 1 (G1) consisted of 23 patients (mean age 12.44 ± 1.59 years) where treatment was initiated before the pubertal growth spurt (CVMS I and II), while group 2 (G2) consisted of 18 patients (mean age 13.76 ± 1.44 years) where treatment was started after the pubertal growth spurt (CVMS III to V). Dentoskeletal measurements were made on lateral cephalograms taken before (T1) and after orthodontic treatment (T2).

Results: During treatment, G1 had significantly greater skeletal correction than G2, with more dentoalveolar effects being observed in G2 than G1. However, on comparing both groups at the end of treatment (T2) when growth is complete, no differences in the parameters measured were observed. Overall, treatment time was significantly longer for G1 (3.67 ± 1.45 years) compared to G2 (2.75 ± 1.07 years).

Conclusions: There is no difference in overall dentoskeletal effects obtained at the end of treatment by the TFBC appliance in normodivergent prepubertal vs postpubertal patients. However, treatment efficiency based on treatment timing is significantly greater for the postpubertal group.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Clinical set up with the TFBC appliance.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
The force system involved with the TFBC appliance. F indicates total force; i, vertical (intrusive) component; r, horizontal component; Mu, moment created on the upper arch; and Ml, moment created on the lower arch.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
Sample distribution.
Figure 4.
Figure 4.
Cephalometric landmarks and planes: 1, S–N plane; 2, sella horizontal (Sh or constructed FH plane or x axis); 3, sella vertical (Sv or y axis); 4, palatal plane (ANS-PNS); 5, occlusal plane (OP); 6, mandibular plane (Go-Gn); 7, tangent to lower border of the mandible.
Figure 5.
Figure 5.
Skeletal parameters. (A) Angular measurements (in degrees): 1, SNA; 2, SNB; 3, ANB; 4, SN Go-Gn; 5, PP-SN; 6, OP-Sh; 7, ArGoMe. (B) Linear measurements (in mm): 8, Co-A; 9, Co-Gn; 10, Go-Gn; 11, UFH; 12, LFH; 13, AFH; 14, PFH.
Figure 6.
Figure 6.
Dental measurements. (A) Angular measurements (in degrees): 1, U1-SN; 6, IMPA. (B) Linear measurements (in mm): 2, U1-Sv; 3, U1-PP; 4, U6-PP; 5, U6-Sv; 7, L1-Sv; 8, L1-MP; 9, L6-MP; 10, L6-Sv.
Figure 7.
Figure 7.
Treatment duration for prepubertal (G1) and postpubertal (G2) treatment groups.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Proffit WR, Fields HW, Jr, Moray LJ. Prevalence of malocclusion and orthodontic treatment need in the United States: estimates from the NHANES III survey. Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg. 1998;13:97–106. - PubMed
    1. Baccetti T, Franchi L, McNamara JA, Jr, Tollaro I. Early dentofacial features of Class II malocclusion: a longitudinal study from the deciduous through the mixed dentition. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1997;111:502–509. - PubMed
    1. Keski-Nisula K, Keski-Nisula L, Mäkelä P, Mäki-Torkko T, Varrela J. Dentofacial features of children with distal occlusions, large overjets, and deepbites in the early mixed dentition. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2006;130:292–299. - PubMed
    1. Stahl F, Baccetti T, Franchi L, McNamara JA., Jr Longitudinal growth changes in untreated subjects with Class II Division 1 malocclusion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2008;134:125–137. - PubMed
    1. Proffit WR. Contemporary orthodontic appliances. In: Profitt WR, Fields HW Jr, Sarver DM, editors. Contemporary Orthodontics 4th ed. St Louis, Mo: Elsevier; 2007. pp. 395–430.

Publication types

MeSH terms