Three-dimensional cone-beam computed tomography comparison of shorty and standard Class II Carriere Motion appliance

Abstract

Objectives: To compare treatment effects of the standard and shorty Class II Carriere Motion appliances (CMAs) on adolescent patients.

Materials and methods: Fifty adolescents with Class II malocclusion formed group 1, who were treated with shorty CMA (n = 25, 12.66 ± 1.05 years), and age- and sex-matched group 2, who were treated with standard CMA (n = 25, 12.73 ± 1.07 years). Treatment effects were analyzed by tracing with Invivo software to compare pretreatment (T1) cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) images with post-CMA (T2) CBCT images. A total of 23 measurements were compared within and between groups.

Results: In groups 1 and 2, maxillary first molars showed significant distal movement from T1 to T2 (1.83 ± 2.11 mm and 2.14 ± 1.34 mm, respectively), with distal tipping and rotation in group 1 (6.52° ± 3.99° and 3.15° ± 7.52°, respectively) but only distal tipping (7.03° ± 3.45°) in group 2. Similarly, in both groups, the maxillary first premolars experienced significant distal movement with distal tipping but no significant rotation. In group 1, maxillary canines did not undergo significant distal movement. In both groups 1 and 2, mandibular first molars experienced significant mesial movement (1.85 ± 1.88 mm and 2.44 ± 2.02 mm, respectively). Group 1 showed statistically significantly less reduction in overjet and less canine distal movement with less distal tipping than group 2 (α < .05).

Conclusions: The shorty CMA achieved Class II correction similarly to the standard CMA, with less change in overjet and distal tipping movement of the maxillary canines.

Keywords: 3D evaluation; CBCT evaluation; Carriere Distalizer; Carriere Motion appliance; Class II; Class II malocclusion.

© 2021 by The EH Angle Education and Research Foundation, Inc.

Figures

Figure 1.

Class II Carriere Motion appliance. (A) Before and (B) after Class II correction.

Figure 2.

Identification of landmarks in CBCT.

Figure 3.

CBCT analysis in anteroposterior and transverse dimensions.