Treatment of a skeletal Class II malocclusion using fixed functional appliance with miniplate anchorage

Mevlut Celikoglu, Tuba Unal, Mehmet Bayram, Celal Candirli, Mevlut Celikoglu, Tuba Unal, Mehmet Bayram, Celal Candirli

Abstract

Based on our literature search, we found that the use of miniplate anchorage with Forsus fatigue-resistance device (FRD) has not yet been reported. Therefore, the aim of the present case report was to present the treatment of a patient with skeletal Class II malocclusion with mandibular retrusion using Forsus FRD with miniplate anchorage. Fixed appliances with 0.022-inch slots were attached to the maxillary teeth and after 8 months of the leveling and alignment of the upper arch, 0.019 × 0.025-inch stainless steel archwire was inserted and cinched back. Two weeks after the placement of the miniplates bilaterally at the symphysis of the mandible, Forsus FRD was adjusted to the miniplates with a 35-mm length of rod chosen. Nine months after the skeletal anchored Forsus worn, Class I canine and molar relations were achieved and overjet was eliminated.

Keywords: Fixed functional appliance; Forsus; miniplate; skeletal anchorage.

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest: None declared

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Extra- and intra-oral photographs of the patient prior to orthodontic treatment
Figure 2
Figure 2
Radiographic views of the patient prior to orthodontic treatment
Figure 3
Figure 3
Extra- and intra-oral photographs of the patient after alignment and leveling
Figure 4
Figure 4
Adjustment of the miniplates on symphysis and application of skeletal anchoraged Forsus FRD
Figure 5
Figure 5
Extra- and intra-oral photographs of the patient after skeletal anchoraged Forsus FRD
Figure 6
Figure 6
Cephalometric lateral films before and after skeletal anchoraged Forsus FRD

References

    1. Schmuth GP. Milestones in the development and practical application of functional appliances. Am J Orthod. 1983;84:48–53.
    1. O’Brien K, Wright J, Conboy F, Sanjie Y, Mandall N, Chadwick S, et al. Effectiveness of treatment for Class II malocclusion with the Herbst or twin-block appliances: A randomized, controlled trial. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2003;124:128–37.
    1. Gunay EA, Arun T, Nalbantgil D. Evaluation of the immediate dentofacial changes in late adolescent patients treated with the forsus (TM) FRD. Eur J Dent. 2011;5:423–32.
    1. Bock NC, Reiser B, Ruf S. Class II subdivision treatment with the Herbst appliance. Angle Orthod. 2013;83:327–33.
    1. Lima KJ, Henriques JF, Janson G, Pereira SC, Neves LS, Cançado RH. Dentoskeletal changes induced by the Jasper jumper and the activator-headgear combination appliances followed by fixed orthodontic treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2013;143:684–94.
    1. Chhibber A, Upadhyay M, Uribe F, Nanda R. Mechanism of Class II correction in prepubertal and postpubertal patients with twin force bite corrector. Angle Orthod. 2013;83:718–27.
    1. Franchi L, Alvetro L, Giuntini V, Masucci C, Defraia E, Baccetti T. Effectiveness of comprehensive fixed appliance treatment used with the forsus fatigue resistant device in Class II patients. Angle Orthod. 2011;81:678–83.
    1. Aras A, Ada E, Saracoğlu H, Gezer NS, Aras I. Comparison of treatments with the forsus fatigue resistant device in relation to skeletal maturity: A cephalometric and magnetic resonance imaging study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2011;140:616–25.
    1. Aslan BI, Kucukkaraca E, Turkoz C, Dincer M. Treatment effects of the forsus fatigue resistant device used with miniscrew anchorage. Angle Orthod. 2014;84:76–87.
    1. Jones G, Buschang PH, Kim KB, Oliver DR. Class II non-extraction patients treated with the forsus fatigue resistant device versus intermaxillary elastics. Angle Orthod. 2008;78:332–8.
    1. Karacay S, Akin E, Olmez H, Gurton AU, Sagdic D. Forsus nitinol flat spring and Jasper jumper corrections of Class II division 1 malocclusions. Angle Orthod. 2006;76:666–72.
    1. Oztoprak MO, Nalbantgil D, Uyanlar A, Arun T. A cephalometric comparative study of class II correction with Sabbagh Universal Spring (SUS (2)) and forsus FRD appliances. Eur J Dent. 2012;6:302–10.
    1. Manni A, Pasini M, Mauro C. Comparison between herbst appliances with or without miniscrew anchorage. Dent Res J (Isfahan) 2012;9(Suppl 2):S216–21.

Source: PubMed

3
Abonnere