Invisible treatment with lingual appliance for the correction of an adult class II subdivision with asymmetrical Wilson and Spee curves: A case report

This article describes a class II subdivision malocclusion successfully treated by an invisible lingual appliance. The combination of en-masse distalization by interradicular palatal mini-screws and inner unilateral class II auxiliaries, first by intermaxillary elastic, later by a class II coil spring, resulted in a dento-alveolar correction, allowing one to maintain the appliance completely invisible. At the same time, the inclination of buccal sectors was normalized by a correct torque expression with set-up overcorrections, resulting in a significant improvement of the buccal corridors. This case report demonstrates the possibility of successfully solving class II division 2 subdivision malocclusion in adult patients without surgery by means of a completely invisible appliance. It also demonstrates that correct levelling and torque expression, for the correction of asymmetrical Spee and Wilson curves, are achievable with an accurate set-up planning. On the other hand, it underlines the necessity of mini-screws, auxiliaries and set-up overcorrections in order to obtain the best results.

Class II subdivision with skeletal transverse maxillary deficit treated by single-sitting bone-borne appliance

This case report describes orthodontic treatment including both skeletal maxillary expansion and unilateral distalization by means of a single bone-borne appliance followed by clear aligner therapy in a young adult patient. A surgical guide was digitally designed and three-dimensionally printed to facilitate the placement of four miniscrews in the palatal vault. The miniscrews were fitted and the bone-borne appliance was delivered in a single clinical appointment. The postexpansion photographic records and models demonstrate the opening of the palatal median suture, the pure skeletal expansion, and the resolution of the left crossbite after 40 activations. Specifically, left molar Class I was obtained in about 5 months without any loss of anterior anchorage, and the subsequent aligner phase achieved all of the objectives established in the treatment plan. This case report shows clearly how careful digital planning of miniscrew insertion and the delivery of a pure bone-borne appliance in a single sitting enabled good clinical outcomes to be achieved in an acceptable timeframe, without side effects, even in a young adult patient.

Asymmetric dental arch treatment with Forsus fatigue appliances: Long-term results

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the treatment efficacy and follow-up stability of the asymmetric Forsus appliance by evaluating longitudinal changes in dental arch asymmetry on digital dental models from 21 patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Maxillary and mandibular reference lines were used for measurements of intra-arch asymmetry at pretreatment (T1), posttreatment (T2), and 4.2 years after treatment (T3). Maxillary and mandibular measurements were performed relative to the dental midline and anterior reference line on digital dental models. To determine the amount of asymmetry between the Class I and Class II sides of a given arch, all maxillary and mandibular parameters were measured on each side of the model separately. Repeated-measures analysis of variance/paired sample t-tests were performed to evaluate dental arch asymmetries at the P < .05 level.

RESULTS

The alveolar transverse dimensions of the posterior segment of both arches were increased during treatment (P < .05) and remained stable during the retention period. Class II subdivision malocclusion was caused by distal positioning of the mandibular canine, premolars, and first molar on the Class II side (P < .05). Asymmetry was resolved by treatment with asymmetric Forsus appliances. The resolved asymmetry remained stable over the long term. There were no significant differences between T2 and T3 (P > .05).

CONCLUSIONS

The asymmetric Forsus appliance can be used to treat dental arch asymmetry in patients with Class II subdivision malocclusions.

Dentoskeletal and soft tissue changes in class II subdivision treatment with asymmetric extraction protocols

Background

This study cephalometrically compared the dentoskeletal and soft tissue changes consequent to one and three-premolar extraction protocols of class II subdivision malocclusion treatment.

Methods

A sample of 126 lateral cephalometric radiographs from 63 patients was selected and divided into two groups. Group 1 consisted of 31 type 1 class II subdivision malocclusion patients treated with asymmetric extractions of two maxillary premolars and one mandibular premolar on the class I side, with an initial mean age of 13.58 years. Group 2 consisted of 32 type 2 class II subdivision malocclusion patients treated with asymmetric extraction of one maxillary first premolar on the class II side, with an initial mean age of 13.98 years. t test was used for intergroup comparison at the pre- and posttreatment stages and to compare the treatment changes.

Results

Group 1 had greater maxillomandibular sagittal discrepancy reduction and greater maxillary first molar extrusion. Group 2 had mandibular incisor labial inclination and protrusion, and group 1 had mandibular incisor lingual inclination and retraction. Maxillary molar asymmetry increased in group 2, while mandibular molar asymmetry increased in group 1.

Conclusions

The treatment changes produced by these two class II subdivision protocols are different to adequately satisfy the different needs for types 1 and 2 class II subdivision malocclusions.

Cone-beam computed tomographic evaluation of the temporomandibular joint and dental characteristics of patients with Class II subdivision malocclusion and asymmetry

OBJECTIVE

Treating Class II subdivision malocclusion with asymmetry has been a challenge for orthodontists because of the complicated characteristics of asymmetry. This study aimed to explore the characteristics of dental and skeletal asymmetry in Class II subdivision malocclusion, and to assess the relationship between the condyle-glenoid fossa and first molar.

METHODS

Cone-beam computed tomographic images of 32 patients with Class II subdivision malocclusion were three-dimensionally reconstructed using the Mimics software. Forty-five anatomic landmarks on the reconstructed structures were selected and 27 linear and angular measurements were performed. Paired-samples t-tests were used to compare the average differences between the Class I and Class II sides; Pearson correlation coefficient (r) was used for analyzing the linear association.

RESULTS

The faciolingual crown angulation of the mandibular first molar (p < 0.05), sagittal position of the maxillary and mandibular first molars (p < 0.01), condylar head height (p < 0.01), condylar process height (p < 0.05), and angle of the posterior wall of the articular tubercle and coronal position of the glenoid fossa (p < 0.01) were significantly different between the two sides. The morphology and position of the condyle-glenoid fossa significantly correlated with the three-dimensional changes in the first molar.

CONCLUSIONS

Asymmetry in the sagittal position of the maxillary and mandibular first molars between the two sides and significant lingual inclination of the mandibular first molar on the Class II side were the dental characteristics of Class II subdivision malocclusion. Condylar morphology and glenoid fossa position asymmetries were the major components of skeletal asymmetry and were well correlated with the three-dimensional position of the first molar.

Three-dimensional positional assessment of glenoid fossae and mandibular condyles in patients with Class II subdivision malocclusion

OBJECTIVES

To test the null hypotheses that the positions of the glenoid fossae and mandibular condyles are identical on the Class I and Class II sides of patients with Class II subdivision malocclusion.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective three-dimensional (3D) assessments of the positions of the glenoid fossae and mandibular condyles were made in patients with Class II malocclusion. Relative to a fiducial reference at the anterior cranial base, distances from the glenoid fossae and condyles were calculated in pretreatment cone beam computed tomographic scans of 82 patients: 41 with Class II and 41 with Class II subdivision malocclusions. The 3D distances from glenoid fossae to sella turcica in the X (right-left), Y (anterior-posterior), Z (inferior-superior) projections were calculated.

RESULTS

Patients with Class II malocclusion displayed a symmetric position of the glenoid fossae and condyles with no statistically significant differences between sides (P > .05), whereas patients with Class II subdivision showed asymmetry in the distance between the glenoid fossae and anterior cranial base or sella turcica (P < .05), with distally and laterally positioned glenoid fossae on the Class II side. (P < .05). Male patients had greater distances between glenoid fossae and anterior cranial fossae (P < .05). The condylar position relative to the glenoid fossae did not differ between the two malocclusion groups nor between males and females (P > .05).

CONCLUSIONS

The null hypotheses were rejected. Patients with Class II subdivision malocclusion displayed asymmetrically positioned right- and left-side glenoid fossae, with a distally and laterally positioned Class II side, although the condyles were symmetrically positioned within the glenoid fossae.

Class II subdivision treatment with the Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device vs intermaxillary elastics

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effectiveness of comprehensive fixed appliance treatments implemented in combination with Forsus or intermaxillary elastics in Class II subdivision subjects.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty-eight Class II subdivision patients were allocated to two groups using matched randomization: Forsus group (mean age, 14.19 ± 1.02 years) and elastics group (mean age, 13.75 ± 1.16 years). Patients received fixed appliance therapy in combination with either Forsus or intermaxillary elastics. The study was conducted on lateral cephalograms and digital models acquired before orthodontic treatment and 10-12 weeks after the fixed appliances were removed.

RESULTS

The treatment phase comprising the use of Forsus (4.53 ± 0.91 months) was significantly shorter compared with elastics application (6.85 ± 1.08 months). This was also true for comparing duration of overall comprehensive treatment in both groups. Extrusion and palatal tipping of maxillary incisors and clockwise rotation of the occlusal plane were greater in the elastics group (P < .05). The mandibular incisors were proclined in both groups (P < .001), but no significant difference was observed between groups (P > .05). The mandibular incisors showed intrusion in the Forsus group and extrusion in the elastics group; the difference between groups was significant (P < .05). Overbite was decreased in both groups (P < .001) in similar amounts. Improvement in overjet, mandibular midline deviation, and correction of molar relationship on the Class II side were greater in the Forsus group (P < .05).

CONCLUSION

Forsus is more effective for correcting Class II subdivision malocclusion in a shorter treatment period with minimal patient compliance required.

Influence of unilateral maxillary first molar extraction treatment on second and third molar inclination in Class II subdivision patients

OBJECTIVE

To assess the maxillary second molar (M2) and third molar (M3) inclination following orthodontic treatment of Class II subdivision malocclusion with unilateral maxillary first molar (M1) extraction.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Panoramic radiographs of 21 Class II subdivision adolescents (eight boys, 13 girls; mean age, 12.8 years; standard deviation, 1.7 years) before treatment, after treatment with extraction of one maxillary first molar and Begg appliances and after at least 1.8 years in retention were retrospectively collected from a private practice. M2 and M3 inclination angles (M2/ITP, M2/IOP, M3/ITP, M3/IOP), constructed by intertuberosity (ITP) and interorbital planes (IOP), were calculated for the extracted and nonextracted segments. Random effects regression analysis was performed to evaluate the effect on the molar angulation of extraction, time, and gender after adjusting for baseline measurements.

RESULTS

Time and extraction status were significant predictors for M2 angulation. M2/ITP and M2/IOP decreased by 4.04 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -6.93, 1.16; P  =  .001) and 3.67 (95% CI: -6.76, -0.58; P  =  .020) in the extraction group compared to the nonextraction group after adjusting for time and gender. The adjusted analysis showed that extraction was the only predictor for M3 angulation that reached statistical significance. M3 mesial inclination increased by 7.38° (95% CI: -11.2, -3.54; P < .001) and 7.33° (95% CI: -11.48, -3.19; P  =  .001).

CONCLUSIONS

M2 and M3 uprighting significantly improved in the extraction side after orthodontic treatment with unilateral maxillary M1 extraction. There was a significant increase in mesial tipping of maxillary second molar crowns over time.

Long-term evaluation of Class II subdivision treatment with unilateral maxillary first molar extraction

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the long-term effects of asymmetrical maxillary first molar (M1) extraction in Class II subdivision treatment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Records of 20 Class II subdivision whites (7 boys, 13 girls; mean age, 13.0 years; SD, 1.7 years) consecutively treated with the Begg technique and M1 extraction, and 15 untreated asymmetrical Class II adolescents (4 boys, 11 girls; mean age, 12.2 years; SD, 1.3 years) were examined in this study. Cephalometric analysis and PAR assessment were carried out before treatment (T1), after treatment (T2), and on average 2.5 years posttreatment (T3) for the treatment group, and at similar time points and average follow-up of 1.8 years for the controls.

RESULTS

The adjusted analysis indicated that the maxillary incisors were 2.3 mm more retracted in relation to A-Pog between T1 and T3 (β  =  2.31; 95% CI; 0.76, 3.87), whereas the mandibular incisors were 1.3 mm more protracted (β  =  1.34; 95% CI; 0.09, 2.59), and 5.9° more proclined to the mandibular plane (β  =  5.92; 95% CI; 1.43, 10.41) compared with controls. The lower lip appeared 1.4 mm more protrusive relative to the subnasale-soft tissue-Pog line throughout the observation period in the treated adolescents (β  =  1.43; 95% CI; 0.18, 2.67). There was a significant PAR score reduction over the entire follow-up period in the molar extraction group (β  =  -6.73; 95% CI; -10.7, -2.7). At T2, 65% of the subjects had maxillary midlines perfectly aligned with the face.

CONCLUSIONS

Unilateral M1 extraction in asymmetrical Class II cases may lead to favorable occlusal outcomes in the long term without harming the midline esthetics and soft tissue profile.