Removable versus fixed myo-functional appliances in class II malocclusion among Indians
- PMID: 38415040
- PMCID: PMC10895520
- DOI: 10.6026/973206300191318
Removable versus fixed myo-functional appliances in class II malocclusion among Indians
Abstract
It is of interest to compare two myofunctional appliances (frankal appliance and twin bloc) and two fixed orthodontic appliances (PowerScope and Forsus) in management of class II div 1 malocclusion. A total of 56 Class II division 1 malocclusion patients indicated for treatment with myofunctional appliances and fixed functional appliances were randomized. They were equally divided among frankal appliance (n=14), twin block appliance (n=14), PowerScope (American Orthodontics) (n=14), Forsus (3M Unitek Corp) groups (n=14). Skeletal and dentoalveolar effects of all appliances were compared. SNB increased remarkably by 4.2° in the Twin block group and it was high among all treatment groups. There was a significant decrease in vertical dimensions (SN-GoGn) in the Twin block (p = 0.002). Early treatment of Class II due to mandibular retrusion with Twin block functional appliance is recommended due to its favorable skeletal effect.
Keywords: Frankal appliance; PowerScope and Forsus; fixed orthodontic appliances; twin block.
© 2023 Biomedical Informatics.
Similar articles
-
Coefficient of efficiency and effectiveness of functional appliances in class II malocclusion treatment : A systematic review.J Orofac Orthop. 2025 Apr 10. doi: 10.1007/s00056-025-00585-y. Online ahead of print. J Orofac Orthop. 2025. PMID: 40208272 Review. English.
-
Comparative evaluation of treatment effects between two fixed functional appliances for correction of Class II malocclusion: A single-center, randomized controlled trial.Angle Orthod. 2018 May;88(3):259-266. doi: 10.2319/071717-476.1. Epub 2018 Mar 8. Angle Orthod. 2018. PMID: 29517274 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
Comparative Evaluation of Twin Block Appliance and Fixed Orthodontic Appliance in Early Class II Malocclusion Treatment: A Randomized Controlled Trial.J Contemp Dent Pract. 2022 Nov 1;23(11):1111-1121. doi: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-3426. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2022. PMID: 37073934 Clinical Trial.
-
Treatment of Skeletal Class II Division 1 Using Twin Block Myofunctional Appliance.Cureus. 2023 Oct 26;15(10):e47713. doi: 10.7759/cureus.47713. eCollection 2023 Oct. Cureus. 2023. PMID: 38022141 Free PMC article.
-
One phase or two phase orthodontic treatment for Class II division 1 malocclusion ?Evid Based Dent. 2019 Sep;20(3):72-73. doi: 10.1038/s41432-019-0049-y. Evid Based Dent. 2019. PMID: 31562403 Review.
Cited by
-
Effect of Fixed Orthodontic Appliances on Oral Microbial Changes and Dental Caries Risk in Children: A 6-Month Prospective Study.J Pharm Bioallied Sci. 2024 Jul;16(Suppl 3):S2353-S2355. doi: 10.4103/jpbs.jpbs_303_24. Epub 2024 May 24. J Pharm Bioallied Sci. 2024. PMID: 39346216 Free PMC article.
-
Coefficient of efficiency and effectiveness of functional appliances in class II malocclusion treatment : A systematic review.J Orofac Orthop. 2025 Apr 10. doi: 10.1007/s00056-025-00585-y. Online ahead of print. J Orofac Orthop. 2025. PMID: 40208272 Review. English.
-
Interceptive Treatment of Class II Malocclusion in Pediatric Patients Using Clear Aligner Mandibular Advancement: A Systematic Review Following PRISMA Guidelines.Cureus. 2025 Apr 11;17(4):e82089. doi: 10.7759/cureus.82089. eCollection 2025 Apr. Cureus. 2025. PMID: 40357108 Free PMC article. Review.
References
-
- Sultan AM, et al. Dental Press J Orthod . 2018;23:40e1.. - PubMed
-
- Toth LR, et al. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop . 1999;116:597. - PubMed
-
- Barnett GA, et al. Angle Orthod . 2008;78:361. - PubMed
-
- Cozza P, et al. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop . 2006;129:599 e1.. - PubMed
-
- Tulloch JFC, et al. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop . 1990;98:340. - PubMed
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources