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
. 2016 Nov;86(6):1026-1032.
doi: 10.2319/122515-887.1. Epub 2016 Mar 28.

Effects of miniplate anchored and conventional Forsus Fatigue Resistant Devices in the treatment of Class II malocclusion

Hakan Turkkahraman, Sule Kocabas Eliacik, Yavuz Findik

Effects of miniplate anchored and conventional Forsus Fatigue Resistant Devices in the treatment of Class II malocclusion

Hakan Turkkahraman et al. Angle Orthod. 2016 Nov.

Abstract

Objective: To compare the skeletal, dentoalveolar, and soft tissue effects of the miniplate anchored Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device (FRD) and the conventional Forsus FRD in the treatment of Class II malocclusion.

Materials and methods: The study was carried out with 30 patients (10 girls, 20 boys). In the MA-Forsus group, 15 patients (2 girls, 13 boys) were treated with a miniplate anchored Forsus FRD for 9.40 ± 2.25 months. In the C-Forsus group, 15 patients (8 girls, 7 boys) were treated with a conventional Forsus FRD for 9.46 ± 0.81 months. A total of 16 measurements were calculated and statistically analyzed to find intragroup and intergroup differences.

Results: Statistically significant differences were found between the groups in IMPA, SN/Occ, SN/GoGn, overjet, overbite, and Li-S measurements (P < .05). In the C-Forsus group, a substantial amount of lower incisor protrusion was observed, whereas retrusion was found in the MA-Forsus group (P < .001). The mandible rotated backward in the MA-Forsus group, whereas it remained unchanged in the C-Forsus group (P < .05). Reductions in overjet (P < .001) and overbite were greater in the C-Forsus group (P < .05).

Conclusion: Stimulation of mandibular growth and inhibition of maxillary growth were achieved in both treatment groups. In the C-Forsus group, a substantial amount of lower incisor protrusion was observed, whereas retrusion of lower incisors was found in the MA-Forsus group. The MA-Forsus group was found to be more advantageous as it had no dentoalveolar side effects on mandibular dentition.

Keywords: Class II malocclusion; Fixed functional appliances; Forsus FRD; Miniplates; TAD.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1. Application of Forsus Fatigue Resistant Devices to dental arches.
Figure 1.
Application of Forsus Fatigue Resistant Devices to dental arches.
Figure 2. Surgical steps of miniplate insertion.
Figure 2.
Surgical steps of miniplate insertion.
Figure 3. Application of Forsus Fatigue Resistant Devices to miniplates.
Figure 3.
Application of Forsus Fatigue Resistant Devices to miniplates.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Sayin MO, Turkkahraman H. Malocclusion and crowding in an orthodontically referred Turkish population. Angle Orthod. 2004;74:635–639. - PubMed
    1. Heinig N, Goz G. Clinical application and effects of the Forsus spring. A study of a new Herbst hybrid. J Orofac Orthop. 2001;62:436–450. - PubMed
    1. Cacciatore G, Ghislanzoni LT, Alvetro L, Giuntini V, Franchi L. Treatment and posttreatment effects induced by the Forsus appliance: a controlled clinical study. Angle Orthod. 2014;84:1010–1017. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Adusumilli SP, Sudhakar P, Mummidi B, et al. Biomechanical and clinical considerations in correcting skeletal class II malocclusion with Forsus. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2012;13:918–924. - PubMed
    1. Oztoprak MO, Nalbantgil D, Uyanlar A, Arun T. A cephalometric comparative study of class II correction with Sabbagh Universal Spring (SUS(2)) and Forsus FRD appliances. Eur J Dent. 2012;6:302–310. - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources