Treatment of adolescent patients with class II division 1 malocclusion using Eruption guidance appliance: A comparative study with Twin-block and Activator-Headgear appliances.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the compliance and short-term effects of eruption guidance appliance (EGA) in adolescents with class II division 1 malocclusion in comparison with twin-block appliance (TBA) and activator-headgear appliance (A-HG). Dental records of 1886 patients were viewed in this retrospective study 129 patients treated with one of these three functional appliances were identified. 123 fulfilled the inclusion criteria and data were extracted from the dental records. Gender, age, compliance, overjet change at every visit, number of appliance breakages and number of emergency visits apart from appliance breakage were studied. The data were analyzed with Chi-square test, General Linear Model and Fisher scoring test. Results showed that 47 patients were treated with EGA, 38 patients with TBA and 38 patients with A-HG. Mean ages starting the treatment were slightly lower with EGA (11.5 years) than with TBA (12.3 years) and A-HG (11.8 years). Non-compliance was higher in the EGA group (31.9%) than TBA group (26.3%) and A-HG group (23.7%). Mean overjet reduction per month was 0.6 mm for EGA which was lower than TBA group (0.7 mm) and A-HG groups (0.7 mm).The number of emergency visits and appliance breakage were lower in EGA group. However, there was no statistically significant difference between the 3 groups regarding ages,compliance, mean overjet reduction, emergency visits and appliance breakage aspects. In conclusion, this study indicates that EGA is an alternative choice in the treatment of adolescent patients with class II division 1 malocclusion. However, long-term follow-up and cephalometric prospective study should be performed to continue our understanding more about the mechanisms of EGA and more definite conclusions can be made.