Effects of miniplate anchored and conventional Forsus Fatigue Resistant Devices in the treatment of Class II malocclusion

Hakan Turkkahraman, Sule Kocabas Eliacik, Yavuz Findik

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

9 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: To compare the skeletal, dentoalveolar, and soft tissue effects of the miniplate anchored Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device (FRD) and the conventional Forsus FRD in the treatment of Class II malocclusion. Materials and Methods: The study was carried out with 30 patients (10 girls, 20 boys). In the MAForsus group, 15 patients (2 girls, 13 boys) were treated with a miniplate anchored Forsus FRD for 9.40 6 2.25 months. In the C-Forsus group, 15 patients (8 girls, 7 boys) were treated with a conventional Forsus FRD for 9.46 6 0.81 months. A total of 16 measurements were calculated and statistically analyzed to find intragroup and intergroup differences. Results: Statistically significant differences were found between the groups in IMPA, SN/Occ, SN/ GoGn, overjet, overbite, and Li-S measurements (P , .05). In the C-Forsus group, a substantial amount of lower incisor protrusion was observed, whereas retrusion was found in the MA-Forsus group (P , .001). The mandible rotated backward in the MA-Forsus group, whereas it remained unchanged in the C-Forsus group (P , .05). Reductions in overjet (P , .001) and overbite were greater in the C-Forsus group (P , .05). Conclusion: Stimulation of mandibular growth and inhibition of maxillary growth were achieved in both treatment groups. In the C-Forsus group, a substantial amount of lower incisor protrusion was observed, whereas retrusion of lower incisors was found in the MA-Forsus group. The MA-Forsus group was found to be more advantageous as it had no dentoalveolar side effects on mandibular dentition.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1026-1032
Number of pages7
JournalAngle Orthodontist
Volume86
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 1 2016
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Overbite
Malocclusion
Fatigue
Equipment and Supplies
Dentition
Incisor
Therapeutics
Growth
Mandible

Keywords

  • Class II malocclusion
  • Fixed functional appliances
  • Forsus FRD
  • Miniplates
  • TAD

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Orthodontics

Cite this

Effects of miniplate anchored and conventional Forsus Fatigue Resistant Devices in the treatment of Class II malocclusion. / Turkkahraman, Hakan; Eliacik, Sule Kocabas; Findik, Yavuz.

In: Angle Orthodontist, Vol. 86, No. 6, 01.11.2016, p. 1026-1032.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{23c1a5e783dd4231a5ac295d3289aa02,
title = "Effects of miniplate anchored and conventional Forsus Fatigue Resistant Devices in the treatment of Class II malocclusion",
abstract = "Objective: To compare the skeletal, dentoalveolar, and soft tissue effects of the miniplate anchored Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device (FRD) and the conventional Forsus FRD in the treatment of Class II malocclusion. Materials and Methods: The study was carried out with 30 patients (10 girls, 20 boys). In the MAForsus group, 15 patients (2 girls, 13 boys) were treated with a miniplate anchored Forsus FRD for 9.40 6 2.25 months. In the C-Forsus group, 15 patients (8 girls, 7 boys) were treated with a conventional Forsus FRD for 9.46 6 0.81 months. A total of 16 measurements were calculated and statistically analyzed to find intragroup and intergroup differences. Results: Statistically significant differences were found between the groups in IMPA, SN/Occ, SN/ GoGn, overjet, overbite, and Li-S measurements (P , .05). In the C-Forsus group, a substantial amount of lower incisor protrusion was observed, whereas retrusion was found in the MA-Forsus group (P , .001). The mandible rotated backward in the MA-Forsus group, whereas it remained unchanged in the C-Forsus group (P , .05). Reductions in overjet (P , .001) and overbite were greater in the C-Forsus group (P , .05). Conclusion: Stimulation of mandibular growth and inhibition of maxillary growth were achieved in both treatment groups. In the C-Forsus group, a substantial amount of lower incisor protrusion was observed, whereas retrusion of lower incisors was found in the MA-Forsus group. The MA-Forsus group was found to be more advantageous as it had no dentoalveolar side effects on mandibular dentition.",
keywords = "Class II malocclusion, Fixed functional appliances, Forsus FRD, Miniplates, TAD",
author = "Hakan Turkkahraman and Eliacik, {Sule Kocabas} and Yavuz Findik",
year = "2016",
month = "11",
day = "1",
doi = "10.2319/122515-887.1",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "86",
pages = "1026--1032",
journal = "Angle Orthodontist",
issn = "0003-3219",
publisher = "E H Angle Orthodontists Research & Education Foundation, Inc.",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Effects of miniplate anchored and conventional Forsus Fatigue Resistant Devices in the treatment of Class II malocclusion

AU - Turkkahraman, Hakan

AU - Eliacik, Sule Kocabas

AU - Findik, Yavuz

PY - 2016/11/1

Y1 - 2016/11/1

N2 - Objective: To compare the skeletal, dentoalveolar, and soft tissue effects of the miniplate anchored Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device (FRD) and the conventional Forsus FRD in the treatment of Class II malocclusion. Materials and Methods: The study was carried out with 30 patients (10 girls, 20 boys). In the MAForsus group, 15 patients (2 girls, 13 boys) were treated with a miniplate anchored Forsus FRD for 9.40 6 2.25 months. In the C-Forsus group, 15 patients (8 girls, 7 boys) were treated with a conventional Forsus FRD for 9.46 6 0.81 months. A total of 16 measurements were calculated and statistically analyzed to find intragroup and intergroup differences. Results: Statistically significant differences were found between the groups in IMPA, SN/Occ, SN/ GoGn, overjet, overbite, and Li-S measurements (P , .05). In the C-Forsus group, a substantial amount of lower incisor protrusion was observed, whereas retrusion was found in the MA-Forsus group (P , .001). The mandible rotated backward in the MA-Forsus group, whereas it remained unchanged in the C-Forsus group (P , .05). Reductions in overjet (P , .001) and overbite were greater in the C-Forsus group (P , .05). Conclusion: Stimulation of mandibular growth and inhibition of maxillary growth were achieved in both treatment groups. In the C-Forsus group, a substantial amount of lower incisor protrusion was observed, whereas retrusion of lower incisors was found in the MA-Forsus group. The MA-Forsus group was found to be more advantageous as it had no dentoalveolar side effects on mandibular dentition.

AB - Objective: To compare the skeletal, dentoalveolar, and soft tissue effects of the miniplate anchored Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device (FRD) and the conventional Forsus FRD in the treatment of Class II malocclusion. Materials and Methods: The study was carried out with 30 patients (10 girls, 20 boys). In the MAForsus group, 15 patients (2 girls, 13 boys) were treated with a miniplate anchored Forsus FRD for 9.40 6 2.25 months. In the C-Forsus group, 15 patients (8 girls, 7 boys) were treated with a conventional Forsus FRD for 9.46 6 0.81 months. A total of 16 measurements were calculated and statistically analyzed to find intragroup and intergroup differences. Results: Statistically significant differences were found between the groups in IMPA, SN/Occ, SN/ GoGn, overjet, overbite, and Li-S measurements (P , .05). In the C-Forsus group, a substantial amount of lower incisor protrusion was observed, whereas retrusion was found in the MA-Forsus group (P , .001). The mandible rotated backward in the MA-Forsus group, whereas it remained unchanged in the C-Forsus group (P , .05). Reductions in overjet (P , .001) and overbite were greater in the C-Forsus group (P , .05). Conclusion: Stimulation of mandibular growth and inhibition of maxillary growth were achieved in both treatment groups. In the C-Forsus group, a substantial amount of lower incisor protrusion was observed, whereas retrusion of lower incisors was found in the MA-Forsus group. The MA-Forsus group was found to be more advantageous as it had no dentoalveolar side effects on mandibular dentition.

KW - Class II malocclusion

KW - Fixed functional appliances

KW - Forsus FRD

KW - Miniplates

KW - TAD

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84994571314&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84994571314&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.2319/122515-887.1

DO - 10.2319/122515-887.1

M3 - Article

C2 - 27018848

AN - SCOPUS:84994571314

VL - 86

SP - 1026

EP - 1032

JO - Angle Orthodontist

JF - Angle Orthodontist

SN - 0003-3219

IS - 6

ER -