{"title":"Comparison of 1-year follow-up results of Forsus, headgear, and extraction treatment in Class II malocclusion.","authors":"Çağrı Yeşildağ, Fundagül Bilgiç Zortuk","doi":"10.1016/j.ajodo.2024.10.011","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>This cross-sectional case-control observational study aimed to use lateral cephalometric radiographs to examine the 1-year follow-up results of 3 different treatment methods during Class II correction.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The authors evaluated the lateral cephalometric records of patients treated with the Forsus fatigue-resistant device (group 1, n = 28), cervical headgears (CHG; group 2, n = 28), and maxillary first premolar extraction with fixed orthodontic appliances (group 3, n = 28). Each group was followed at pretreatment, posttreatment, and 1-year posttreatment. The data obtained were analyzed using the 1-way analysis of variance and Kruskal-Wallis methods.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>At posttreatment, the ANB angle decreased significantly (P = 0.001) in the CHG group compared with the Forsus and extraction groups. The lower and upper facial heights of the CHG group were significantly increased (P <0.001) at posttreatment compared with the other groups. The mandibular incisor protrusion in the Forsus group was significantly higher (P = 0.005) than in the extraction patients, and extrusion of the mandibular incisors was significantly higher (P = 0.002) in the CHG group than in the Forsus group at posttreatment.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>All 3 methods were effective in correcting Class II malocclusion, mainly at the dentoalveolar level, but some amount of relapses occurred after 1-year of follow-up. Distance of mandibular incisors and the mandibular plane changed significantly, increasing in CHG and extraction groups after 1-year of follow-up.</p>","PeriodicalId":50806,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2024.10.011","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: This cross-sectional case-control observational study aimed to use lateral cephalometric radiographs to examine the 1-year follow-up results of 3 different treatment methods during Class II correction.
Methods: The authors evaluated the lateral cephalometric records of patients treated with the Forsus fatigue-resistant device (group 1, n = 28), cervical headgears (CHG; group 2, n = 28), and maxillary first premolar extraction with fixed orthodontic appliances (group 3, n = 28). Each group was followed at pretreatment, posttreatment, and 1-year posttreatment. The data obtained were analyzed using the 1-way analysis of variance and Kruskal-Wallis methods.
Results: At posttreatment, the ANB angle decreased significantly (P = 0.001) in the CHG group compared with the Forsus and extraction groups. The lower and upper facial heights of the CHG group were significantly increased (P <0.001) at posttreatment compared with the other groups. The mandibular incisor protrusion in the Forsus group was significantly higher (P = 0.005) than in the extraction patients, and extrusion of the mandibular incisors was significantly higher (P = 0.002) in the CHG group than in the Forsus group at posttreatment.
Conclusions: All 3 methods were effective in correcting Class II malocclusion, mainly at the dentoalveolar level, but some amount of relapses occurred after 1-year of follow-up. Distance of mandibular incisors and the mandibular plane changed significantly, increasing in CHG and extraction groups after 1-year of follow-up.
期刊介绍:
Published for more than 100 years, the American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics remains the leading orthodontic resource. It is the official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, the American Board of Orthodontics, and the College of Diplomates of the American Board of Orthodontics. Each month its readers have access to original peer-reviewed articles that examine all phases of orthodontic treatment. Illustrated throughout, the publication includes tables, color photographs, and statistical data. Coverage includes successful diagnostic procedures, imaging techniques, bracket and archwire materials, extraction and impaction concerns, orthognathic surgery, TMJ disorders, removable appliances, and adult therapy.