The Efficacy of the RME II System Compared with a Herbst Appliance in the Treatment of Class II Skeletal Malocclusion in Growing Patients: A Retrospective Study.

IF 2.5 Q2 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE Dentistry Journal Pub Date : 2024-08-13 DOI:10.3390/dj12080254
Domenico Ciavarella, Mauro Lorusso, Carlotta Fanelli, Donatella Ferrara, Rosa Esposito, Michele Laurenziello, Fariba Esperouz, Lucio Lo Russo, Michele Tepedino
{"title":"The Efficacy of the RME II System Compared with a Herbst Appliance in the Treatment of Class II Skeletal Malocclusion in Growing Patients: A Retrospective Study.","authors":"Domenico Ciavarella, Mauro Lorusso, Carlotta Fanelli, Donatella Ferrara, Rosa Esposito, Michele Laurenziello, Fariba Esperouz, Lucio Lo Russo, Michele Tepedino","doi":"10.3390/dj12080254","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>(1) Background: The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of the Rapid Maxillary Expander (RME) II System compared to a Herbst appliance and a control group in the treatment of class II skeletal malocclusions in growing patients. (2) Methods: A total of 30 class II patients treated using the RME II System (group R) were compared with 30 patients treated with a Herbst appliance (group H) and 30 untreated class II children (group C). Cephalograms were compared at the start (T0) and after 24 months (T1). Nine cephalometric parameters were analyzed: SN-MP, SN-PO, ANB, AR-GO-ME, AR-GO-N, N-GO-ME, SN-PP, LFH, CO-GN, 1+SN, IMPA, OVERJET, and OVERBITE. Since the variables failed the normality test, a Wilcoxon test was performed for a pairwise comparison of the cephalometric measurements taken at T0 (pre-treatment) and at T1 (post-treatment). ANOVA with Tukey post hoc correction was used to evaluate the differences among the groups. (3) Results: ANOVA showed a statistically significant difference for all analyzed variables except for AR-GO-ME, AR-GO-N, and N-GO-ME. Post hoc Tukey's HSD test showed the following difference: the SN-PO angle in group H was 3.59° greater than in group R; the LFH in group H was 4.13 mm greater than in group R. The mandibular length (CO-GN) in group H was 3.94 mm greater than in group R; IMPA in group H was 6.4° greater than in group R; and the ANB angle in group H was 1.47° greater than in group R. (4) Conclusions: The RME II System is an effective therapeutic device for class II skeletal malocclusion treatment in growing patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":11269,"journal":{"name":"Dentistry Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11354209/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dentistry Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/dj12080254","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

(1) Background: The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of the Rapid Maxillary Expander (RME) II System compared to a Herbst appliance and a control group in the treatment of class II skeletal malocclusions in growing patients. (2) Methods: A total of 30 class II patients treated using the RME II System (group R) were compared with 30 patients treated with a Herbst appliance (group H) and 30 untreated class II children (group C). Cephalograms were compared at the start (T0) and after 24 months (T1). Nine cephalometric parameters were analyzed: SN-MP, SN-PO, ANB, AR-GO-ME, AR-GO-N, N-GO-ME, SN-PP, LFH, CO-GN, 1+SN, IMPA, OVERJET, and OVERBITE. Since the variables failed the normality test, a Wilcoxon test was performed for a pairwise comparison of the cephalometric measurements taken at T0 (pre-treatment) and at T1 (post-treatment). ANOVA with Tukey post hoc correction was used to evaluate the differences among the groups. (3) Results: ANOVA showed a statistically significant difference for all analyzed variables except for AR-GO-ME, AR-GO-N, and N-GO-ME. Post hoc Tukey's HSD test showed the following difference: the SN-PO angle in group H was 3.59° greater than in group R; the LFH in group H was 4.13 mm greater than in group R. The mandibular length (CO-GN) in group H was 3.94 mm greater than in group R; IMPA in group H was 6.4° greater than in group R; and the ANB angle in group H was 1.47° greater than in group R. (4) Conclusions: The RME II System is an effective therapeutic device for class II skeletal malocclusion treatment in growing patients.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
RME II 系统与赫氏矫治器在治疗生长期患者 II 类骨骼错合畸形方面的疗效比较:回顾性研究。
(1) 背景:本研究的目的是评估快速上颌扩弓器(RME)II系统与赫氏矫治器和对照组相比,在治疗生长期患者的II类骨骼畸形方面的疗效。(2)方法:将使用 RME II 系统治疗的 30 名 II 类患者(R 组)与使用赫氏矫正器治疗的 30 名患者(H 组)和 30 名未经治疗的 II 类儿童(C 组)进行比较。比较了开始治疗时(T0)和 24 个月后(T1)的头影。对九个头颅测量参数进行了分析:SN-MP、SN-PO、ANB、AR-GO-ME、AR-GO-N、N-GO-ME、SN-PP、LFH、CO-GN、1+SN、IMPA、OVERJET 和 OVERBITE。由于这些变量未能通过正态性检验,因此采用 Wilcoxon 检验对 T0(治疗前)和 T1(治疗后)的头颅测量结果进行配对比较。采用方差分析和 Tukey 后校正来评估组间差异。(3) 结果:方差分析显示,除 AR-GO-ME、AR-GO-N 和 N-GO-ME 外,所有分析变量的差异均有统计学意义。H组的下颌长度(CO-GN)比R组大3.94毫米;H组的IMPA比R组大6.4°;H组的ANB角比R组大1.47°:RME II 系统是治疗生长期患者 II 类骨骼错合畸形的有效治疗设备。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Dentistry Journal
Dentistry Journal Dentistry-Dentistry (all)
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
7.70%
发文量
213
审稿时长
11 weeks
期刊最新文献
Asymmetric Dimethylarginine as a Potential Mediator in the Association between Periodontitis and Cardiovascular Disease: A Systematic Review of Current Evidence. Effect of a Novel Ergonomic Sheath on Dental Device-Related Muscle Work, Fatigue and Comfort-A Pilot Clinical Study. Evaluating Treatment Modalities for Reducing Recurrence in Central Giant Cell Granuloma: A Narrative Review. Influence of Direct Coronal Restoration Materials on the Fracture Resistance of Endodontically Treated Premolars: An In Vitro Study. Clinical Performance of Extra-Short (≤5.5 mm) Compared to Longer Implants Splinted under the Same Prosthesis: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1