American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics · 2019
Herbst appliance anchored to miniscrews in the upper and lower arches vs standard Herbst: A pilot study.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Manni Antonio, Migliorati Marco, Calzolari Chiara, Silvestrini-Biavati Armando
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: The aim of this pilot study was to present the preliminary results of Class II malocclusion treatment using a skeletally anchored Herbst appliance with miniscrews inserted in the maxillary and mandibular arches to improve anchorage control and skeletal effects.
METHODS: The treatment group (TG) consisted of 13 patients (10 males [M], 3 females [F]; mean age of 12.8 years) with Class II Division 1 malocclusion who were treated with the Herbst appliance and miniscrews inserted in the maxillary and mandibular arches. They were compared with a control group (CG) of 13 patients (10 F, 3 M, mean age of 12.2 years) with Class II Division 1 malocclusion treated with the standard Herbst appliance without miniscrews. Lateral cephalograms were taken before and after Herbst treatment, and cephalometric analysis was performed.
RESULTS: In the TG group SNB (°) increased by 2.9°, whereas in CG group SNB (°) increased by 1.1° (P = 0.017). ANB (°) decreased in both groups: -3.3° in the TG group vs -1.3° in the CG group (P = 0.014). Pg-OLp distance increased in both groups: 5.70 mm in the TG group and 0.8 mm in the CG group (P = 0.022). Mandibular incisors proclined 1.6° in the TG group and 3.7° in the CG group.
CONCLUSIONS: Herbst treatment reinforced with 4 miniscrews (2 in each arch) increased the orthopedic effect of treatment in growing patients with Class II malocclusion.
METHODS: The treatment group (TG) consisted of 13 patients (10 males [M], 3 females [F]; mean age of 12.8 years) with Class II Division 1 malocclusion who were treated with the Herbst appliance and miniscrews inserted in the maxillary and mandibular arches. They were compared with a control group (CG) of 13 patients (10 F, 3 M, mean age of 12.2 years) with Class II Division 1 malocclusion treated with the standard Herbst appliance without miniscrews. Lateral cephalograms were taken before and after Herbst treatment, and cephalometric analysis was performed.
RESULTS: In the TG group SNB (°) increased by 2.9°, whereas in CG group SNB (°) increased by 1.1° (P = 0.017). ANB (°) decreased in both groups: -3.3° in the TG group vs -1.3° in the CG group (P = 0.014). Pg-OLp distance increased in both groups: 5.70 mm in the TG group and 0.8 mm in the CG group (P = 0.022). Mandibular incisors proclined 1.6° in the TG group and 3.7° in the CG group.
CONCLUSIONS: Herbst treatment reinforced with 4 miniscrews (2 in each arch) increased the orthopedic effect of treatment in growing patients with Class II malocclusion.