Treatment stability with bonded versus vacuum-formed retainers after 12 months: A randomized clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical effectiveness of V-bend bonded retainers (BR) versus vacuum-formed retainers (VFR) regarding their capacity to maintain treatment stability and survival rates after 12 months. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients finishing orthodontic treatment were randomly allocated into two groups. The BR group received maxillary and mandibular BRs in the lingual surfaces of the anterior teeth. The VFR group received VFRs right after fixed appliances removal. The patients were evaluated at four time-points: at fixed appliances removal (T0), after 3 (T1), 6 (T2) and 12 months (T3). In each time-point digital models were obtained and analysed with the OrthoAnalyzer™ software. Treatment stability based on occlusal outcomes and retainers' survival rates were evaluated. Intergroup comparisons were performed using Mann-Whitney U-tests. The Kaplan-Meier survival plot and the log-rank test were employed to assess the retainers' survival. RESULTS: Both BR and VFR groups included 25 patients. The groups were comparable regarding their baseline characteristics. Up to 6 months, both retainers were equally effective; however, after 12 months, BRs were more effective in maintaining the incisors' alignment in the maxilla and the mandible compared to the VFRs. No differences were noticed in the intercanine and intermolar widths, overjet and overbite. There were no differences regarding the retainers' survivability in both arches. CONCLUSIONS: BRs were more effective in maintaining the alignment of the incisors in the maxilla and mandible compared to VFRs after 12 months. Both retainers presented the same survival rates after the same period.

Treatment of Class II malocclusion with 2-maxillary premolar extractions: Monthly vs biweekly appointments, which is more efficient?

INTRODUCTION: This study compared whether there is a difference in treatment time (TT) and efficiency when appointments are held once a month or at 2-week intervals in patients with Class II malocclusion treated with 2-premolar extractions METHODS: The patients of this retrospective sample were treated with the same orthodontic mechanics and divided into 2 groups according to frequencies of orthodontic appointments. Group 1 consisted of 18 patients (10 males, 8 females), with an initial mean age of 14.38 ± 1.38 years and appointments once a month. Group 2 consisted of 19 patients (9 males, 10 females), with an initial mean age of 14.12 ± 1.38 years and biweekly appointments. Edgewise fixed appliances with a slot size of 0.022 × 0.028 mm were used, and the anterior teeth were retracted en-masse with a rectangular wire and elastic chains. The Peer Assessment Rating and Objective Grading System indexes were measured in the dental models at the beginning and the end of treatment. Efficiency was assessed by dividing the percentage of improvement of each occlusal index concerning the multiplication of TT and the number of appointments. RESULTS: Both groups presented similar Peer Assessment Rating and Objective Grading System indexes at the end of treatment. Groups 1 and 2 presented different TTs (28.06 and 22.05 months, respectively); however, there were no differences regarding the efficiency of both protocols. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with Class II malocclusion treated with 2-maxillary premolars had significantly shorter treatment times when seen on biweekly appointments than those with monthly appointments; however, there was no difference in efficiency between protocols.

Longitudinal behavior of orthodontic extraction spaces: A retrospective dental cast analysis.

INTRODUCTION: This retrospective study aimed to qualitatively and quantitatively evaluate orthodontic extraction space behavior and size at the end of treatment and the short- and long-term stages in Class I, II, and III malocclusions. METHODS: The sample comprised records of 1283 orthodontic patients treated with extractions (cross-sectional group). From these patients, 1- and 5-year posttreatment records of 214 patients were additionally evaluated (longitudinal group). Orthodontic extraction sites of immediate (end of treatment), short-term (1-year posttreatment), and long-term (5-year posttreatment) stage dental casts were measured with a digital caliper. Extraction spaces were classified according to their qualitative behavior in the open, closed, reopened, and recently closed spaces. Space qualitative longitudinal behavior was compared among the malocclusion types with chi-square tests. Kolmogorov-Smirnov normality tests were performed to check the variable's distribution. All variables showed normal distribution, except the malocclusion group ages. Therefore, parametric tests were used for all comparisons between the malocclusion groups, except for age comparisons in each stage, which were compared with the Kruskal-Wallis tests. Thus, space size and its reduction were compared among the 3 stages, in general, and between the maxillary and mandibular arches, with analysis of variance followed by Tukey tests and t tests, respectively. RESULTS: Classes I, II, and III malocclusion patients presented similar ages at each stage. At the end of treatment, 71.4% and 65.1% of the quadrants were closed in the cross-sectional and longitudinal groups, respectively, and 43.6% and 38.2% of patients presented all quadrants closed at this same stage in both groups. The reopening and late closure tendencies were 2.9 and 2.3 times greater in the short term than in the long term. Reopening tendency in the short-term was greater in Class II than in Class I malocclusion. Of the quadrants closed at the end of treatment, 87% were stable in the long term. From the quadrants with residual spaces at the end of treatment, 28.4% persisted openly in the long term. Residual space size reduced significantly in the short and long term, primarily in the mandibular arch. CONCLUSIONS: The percentage of patients with residual spaces at the end of treatment was 56.4%. Space reopening and late closure occur mainly in the first year after treatment. There was long-term stability in 87% of the quadrants closed at the end of treatment. There was a significant reduction in orthodontic extraction space size in the short and long term, especially in the mandibular arch.

Stability of Class II malocclusion treatment with Class II elastics.

INTRODUCTION: The objective of this study was to compare the long-term cephalometric stability after successful therapy of nonextraction Class II malocclusion with elastics and with headgear. METHODS: The sample comprised 43 patients with Class II malocclusion and was divided into 2 groups. The elastic group (EG) consisted of 20 patients treated with fixed appliances associated with Class II elastics, and the headgear group (HG) consisted of 23 patients treated with fixed appliances and extraoral headgear. Pretreatment, posttreatment, and long-term posttreatment lateral radiographs were evaluated; t tests were used to compare the long-term posttreatment changes between the groups. RESULTS: The groups were matched regarding initial age, time of long-term posttreatment evaluation, initial malocclusion severity, quality of treatment result, and all pretreatment cephalometric variables. Intergroup comparisons of long-term posttreatment changes showed that the HG group presented significantly greater mandibular protrusion, occlusal plane angle decrease, and maxillary molar mesialization. However, long-term posttreatment stability was similar in overjet, overbite, and molar relationships. CONCLUSIONS: Nonextraction Class II malocclusion treatment with elastics or extraoral headgear have similar long-term posttreatment stability.

Twin-block and mandibular anterior repositioning appliances effects in Class II malocclusion correction.

INTRODUCTION: The objective of this study was to compare the cephalometric changes in Class II Division 1 malocclusion patients treated with the Twin-block (TB) and the mandibular anterior repositioning appliance (MARA). METHODS: This retrospective study was performed with 132 lateral cephalograms of patients with Class II malocclusion divided into 3 groups: a TB group comprised 21 patients with mean initial and final ages of 10.59 and 11.97 years, respectively, treated for a mean period of 1.38 years; a MARA group comprised 21 patients with mean initial and final ages of 11.98 and 13.20 years, respectively, treated for a mean period of 1.22 years; and a control group included 24 subjects with untreated Class II malocclusion with mean initial and final ages of 10.55 and 12.01 years, respectively, observed for a mean period of 1.46 years. Cephalometric intergroup comparisons regarding the treatment changes (T2 - T1) were performed with the analysis of covariance, followed by Tukey tests. RESULTS: Both appliances demonstrated significant restriction of the maxilla and improvement of the maxillomandibular relationship. The MARA produced a significantly greater amount of labial tipping and protrusion of the mandibular incisors than the other groups. The TB showed significant extrusion of the mandibular incisors and molars compared with MARA and control, respectively. Both treated groups reduced the overjet and overbite. The MARA presented a significantly greater reduction in the molar relationship than the other groups. CONCLUSIONS: The appliances showed a headgear effect on the maxilla and effectively changed Class II cephalometric parameters through a combination of skeletal and dentoalveolar effects. TB showed a greater increase in LAFH. MARA promoted greater labial tipping and protrusion of the mandibular incisors.

Root resorption in Class II malocclusion treatment with and without maxillary premolar extractions.

INTRODUCTION: Class II malocclusion treatment efficiency with maxillary premolar extractions has been reported. However, no study evaluated the root resorption associated with this protocol. Therefore, this study aimed to compare the degree of root resorption of the maxillary incisors in Class II malocclusion treatment with and without maxillary premolar extractions. METHODS: The sample consisted of 56 patients with complete Class II malocclusion, divided into 2 groups. Group 1 comprised 28 patients (10 female, 18 male) treated with maxillary first premolar extractions, and group 2 was composed of 28 patients (16 female, 12 male) treated without extractions. The groups were matched regarding initial age, treatment time, crowding, initial malocclusion severity, finishing quality, initial overjet, and overbite. Periapical radiographs of the maxillary incisors were used to assess the degree of root resorption using a scoring system. In addition, treatment changes involving maxillary incisors were evaluated in lateral headfilms. Intergroup comparisons were performed with t, Mann-Whitney U, and chi-square tests (P <0.05). RESULTS: Overjet, overbite, inclination, vertical positional changes, and vertical and horizontal apical displacements of maxillary incisors were similar between groups. There was no statistically significant difference between groups regarding root resorption of maxillary incisors. Root resorption degree ranged from mild to moderate in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Treating complete Class II malocclusion with 2 maxillary premolar extractions resulted in a similar root resorption as treating without maxillary premolar extractions. An individualized evaluation of root resorption predisposing factors should be performed for each patient.

Finite element analysis of two skeletally anchored maxillary molar distalisation methods.

OBJECTIVE: To compare two methods of maxillary molar distalisation with skeletal anchorage using finite element analysis (FEA). METHODS: Two digitised models were created: the miniscrew-anchored distaliser, which consisted of a distalisation method anchored in a buccal miniscrew between the first molar and second premolar (Model 1), and the miniscrew-anchored palatal appliance, which consisted of a distalisation method anchored in a miniscrew on the anterior region of the palate (Model 2). FEA was used to simulate both methods, assessing teeth displacements and stress concentration. RESULTS: The miniscrew-anchored distaliser showed greater buccal than distal displacement of the first molar, while the opposite was observed in the miniscrew-anchored palatal appliance. The second molar responded similarly in the transverse and anteroposterior perspectives with both appliances. Greater displacements were observed at crown level than in apical regions. Greater stress concentration was observed at the buccal and cervical regions of the crown in the miniscrew-anchored distaliser and the palatal and cervical regions in the palatal appliance. The stress progressively spread in the buccal side of the alveolar bone for the miniscrew-anchored distaliser and in the palatal root and alveolar bone for the palatal appliance. CONCLUSION: FEA assumes that both appliances would promote maxillary molar distalisation. A skeletally anchored palatal distalisation force seems to provide a greater molar bodily movement with less undesirable effects. Greater stress is expected at the crown and cervical regions during distalisation, and the stress concentration in the roots and alveolar bone depends directly on the region the force was applied.

Changes in third molar position after Class II subdivision malocclusion treatment with asymmetric extractions.

INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to assess the changes in third molars angulation and their available space after Class II subdivision malocclusion treatment with asymmetric premolar extractions. METHODS: The sample consisted of 37 patients (17 male, 20 female and mean age 13.18 ± 1.99 years) in group 1 (Type 1 Class II subdivision) and 25 (10 male, 15 female, mean age 13.56 ± 2.46 years) in group 2 (Type 2 Class II subdivision). In group 1, extractions were performed in the two maxillary quadrants and in the Class I mandibular quadrant. In group 2, extraction was performed in the Class II maxillary quadrant. Panoramic radiographs were used to evaluate third molar angulations and their available space pre- and post-treatment. Radiographic measurements were performed with Dolphin® Imaging 11.9. Paired t tests were used for intragroup comparison between stages and sides. RESULTS: In Type 1, there were similar improvements in third molar angulations and increases in the space available on the extraction quadrants in the maxillary arch. In the mandibular arch, there was significantly greater improvement in angulation and greater space availability in the extraction quadrant after treatment. In Type 2, there was significantly greater improvement in angulation and available space for the maxillary third molar on the extraction quadrant. In the mandibular arch, there was a similar improvement in the available space for the third molars. CONCLUSIONS: After treatment, both groups presented better angulation and significantly greater space for third molar eruptions on the extraction quadrants, when compared to the homologous non-extraction quadrants.

Comparison and reproducibility of three methods for maxillary digital dental model registration in open bite patients.

OBJECTIVE: To compare and assess the reproducibility of 3 methods for registration of maxillary digital dental models in patients with anterior open bite. Settings and sample population Digital dental models of 16 children with an anterior open bite in the mixed dentition were obtained before (T1) and after 12 months of treatment with bonded spurs (T2). METHODS: Landmarks were placed on all T2 models and 3 registration methods (R1, R2 and R3) were independently performed by 2 observers. R1 was based on 10 landmarks placed on posterior teeth. R2 was based on 5 landmarks on the palate (2 anterior, 2 posterior and 1 central). R3 used regions of interest around the 5 palatal landmarks used in R2. The differences between the registration methods were calculated by comparing the mean differences and standard deviations between the corresponding x, y and z coordinates of 6 corresponding landmarks in the T2 registered models. Repeated measures analysis of variance followed by post-hoc Bonferroni tests were used for comparisons (P < .05). The agreement between methods and the intra and interobserver reproducibility were assessed with Bland-Altman tests and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC). RESULTS: Comparisons of R2 with R3 methods showed greater agreement, mean differences ≤0.50 mm for all landmarks, than comparisons of R1 with R2, and R1 with R3, mean differences >0.50 mm for most of the y and z coordinates (P < .05). The R1 and R3 methods presented excellent intra and interobserver reproducibility and R2 method had moderate interobserver reproducibility. CONCLUSIONS: Longitudinal assessments of open bite treatment using digital dental models could consider the posterior teeth and/or the palate as references. The R1 and R3 methods showed adequate reproducibility and yield different quantitative results. The choice will depend on the posterior teeth changes and dental models' characteristics.

Upper airway changes in Class III patients using miniscrew-anchored maxillary protraction with hybrid and hyrax expanders: a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the upper airway space changes after miniscrew-anchored maxillary protraction with hybrid (HH) and conventional hyrax (CH) expanders. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The sample comprised Class III malocclusion growing patients that were randomized into two groups of miniscrew-anchored maxillary protraction. The group HH was treated with a hybrid hyrax appliance in the maxilla and two miniscrews distally to the canines in the mandible. Class III elastics were used from the maxillary first molar to the mandibular miniscrews until anterior crossbite correction. The group CH was treated with a similar protocol except for the conventional hyrax expander in the maxilla. Cone-beam computed tomography was obtained before (T1) and after 12 months of therapy (T2). The shape and size of upper airway were assessed. Intergroup comparisons were performed using Mann-Whitney U test (p < 0.05). RESULTS: The group HH was composed of 20 patients (8 female, 12 male) with a mean age of 10.76 years. The group CH was composed of 15 patients (6 female, 9 male) with a mean age of 11.52 years. Anteroposterior and transverse increases of the upper airway were found for both groups. The oropharynx and the most constricted area increased similarly in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: No differences in upper airway changes were observed using protraction anchored on hybrid or conventional hyrax expanders. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Maxillary protraction anchored on hybrid or conventional hyrax expanders may benefit patients with breathing disorders due to the increase of the upper airway volume and most constricted area. Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03712007).

Stability of first and second premolars extraction space closure.

INTRODUCTION: Premolars are the teeth most often extracted to provide space to correct crowding, excessive dental and/or labial protrusion, and to compensate for the sagittal discrepancy. After treatment, the extraction spaces have to remain closed. Nevertheless, several studies have shown a tendency for some relapse even in patients finished with an adequate occlusion. Thus, the objective of this study was to compare the stability of extraction space closure of the first and second premolars. METHODS: Dental casts of 72 patients were digitized using a 3-dimensional scanner (R700; 3Shape, Copenhagen, Denmark) and divided into 2 groups. Group 1 (29 patients; mean age, 13.79 years; 4.57 years after treatment; 116 extraction spaces) was treated with first premolar extractions, and group 2 (43 patients; mean age, 15.20 years; 3.97 years after treatment; 100 extraction spaces) was treated with second premolar extractions. Chi-square tests were used to compare the numbers of open and closed extraction spaces after treatment and at the long-term posttreatment stage. t Tests were used to compare the number of spaces posttreatment and at the long-term posttreatment stages. These tests were also performed in subgroups with completely closed extraction sites posttreatment. RESULTS: The groups showed similar numbers of extraction sites reopening. The first and second premolar extraction space closure presents a similar tendency for reopening. Considering only the patients that showed completely closed extraction spaces in the final dental models, maxillary extraction space reopening was larger in the first premolar extraction group. CONCLUSIONS: First and second premolar extraction space closure present similar stability.

Treatment of Class II malocclusion with a customized lingual appliance combined with a Class II corrector.

Correcting a complete Class II malocclusion in an adult patient can be quite difficult. If the patient has a large skeletal discrepancy, orthognathic surgery is the treatment of choice. However, if the discrepancy is small or if the situation is borderline and the mandibular incisors are retroclined, Class II correctors can be used. This clinical report presents the orthodontic treatment of a 24-year-old woman with Class II malocclusion. Clinically, her maxilla was slightly protruded, and the mandible was well-positioned. She had uprighted maxillary and mandibular anterior teeth and a deepbite, and she opted for a more esthetically appealing orthodontic appliance. The treatment plan included leveling and alignment of the teeth in both arches, Class II correction, establishing Class I molar and canine relationships, correction of overbite and overjet, adjustment of midlines, and improvement of facial and dental esthetics. Orthodontic treatment consisted of customized lingual appliances combined with a Class II fixed corrector.

Effects of the Forsus fatigue-resistant device and mandibular anterior repositioning appliance in Class II malocclusion treatment.

INTRODUCTION: Fixed functional appliances have been used to treat Class II malocclusion by a huge number of professionals. This retrospective study aimed to analyze the effects of the Forsus fatigue-resistant device and compare the findings with a well-matched group treated with the mandibular anterior repositioning appliance (MARA). METHODS: The Forsus group was composed of 14 patients at an initial mean age of 12.4 ± 1.3 years, treated with the Forsus fatigue-resistant device followed by a fixed orthodontic appliance. The MARA group comprised 18 patients at an initial mean age of 12.1 ± 1.3 years, treated with MARA followed by fixed orthodontic appliances. The untreated control group consisted of 14 patients matched with the other groups. Posttreatment changes were calculated as T1 - T2. Intergroup comparisons regarding treatment changes were performed using repeated-measures analysis of variance followed by Tukey's test. RESULTS: During treatment, the Forsus group showed a statistically significant decrease in maxillary protrusion and maxillomandibular sagittal discrepancy in the control group. The MARA group showed significantly greater retrusion of maxillary incisors than the Forsus and the control group. Overjet decreased significantly more in the treated groups in relation to the control group. Molar relationship improved significantly more in both treated groups, and both showed more correction than the untreated control group. CONCLUSIONS: The Forsus and MARA associated with fixed appliances effectively corrected the Class II malocclusion, mostly using dentoalveolar changes and maxillary growth restriction.

Long-term stability of Class II malocclusion treatment with the cantilever bite jumper.

INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to assess the long-term stability of Class II malocclusion treatment with the Cantilever Bite Jumper (CBJ) after 13 years of follow-up. METHODS: The treatment group comprised 10 Class II Division 1 malocclusion patients treated with the CBJ, followed by fixed appliances, analyzed at 3 stages: pretreatment (aged 11.56-14.32 years), posttreatment (aged 16.34-19.58 years), and long-term posttreatment (aged 29.04-32.33 years). The control group included 15 subjects with normal occlusion. Intragroup treatment changes comparison was performed with repeated measures and analysis of variance followed by Tukey tests. Intergroup comparisons regarding the long-term posttreatment changes were performed with t tests. RESULTS: No statistically significant relapse was observed during the follow-up period. Morever, the treated group presented a significantly smaller increase in lower anterior facial height and greater retrusion of the lower lip than the control group in the posttreatment period. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with the CBJ, followed by fixed appliances, is a stable alternative for Class II Division 1 malocclusion correction. The dentoskeletal and soft-tissue changes obtained during treatment remained stable in the long-term posttreatment follow-up.

Treatment stability with bonded versus vacuum-formed retainers: a systematic review of randomized clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: In orthodontics, the retention phase can be considered challenging and unpredictable. Therefore, evidence obtained from different retention protocols is important to facilitate clinical decision-making. OBJECTIVES: This systematic review aimed to compare the clinical effectiveness of bonded versus vacuum-formed retainers (VFRs) regarding their capacity to maintain treatment stability, periodontal effects, and failure rates. SEARCH METHODS AND ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Ten databases comprising published and unpublished literature were systematically searched up to August 2021. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing both retainers were included. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The risk of bias (RoB) evaluation was performed with the Cochrane Collaboration RoB Tool 2.0. All steps of the screening phase and RoB assessment were performed independently by two reviewers. The Grade of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) was used to evaluate the certainty of the evidence. RESULTS: Initial database search yielded 923 studies. After duplicates removal and full-text assessment, five RCTs remained. Overall, the studies presented Low RoB, except one study judged with 'Some concerns'. Based on the included studies, on a short-term (3-6 months) and long-term (4 years) basis, bonded retainers (BRs) were more effective to maintain treatment stability than VFRs in the lower arch. However, from 12 to 24 months both retainers presented the same efficacy. In the upper arch, the retainers were equally effective. BRs were associated with greater plaque and calculus accumulation than VFRs after 12 months. The retainers' failure rates were similar in the upper arch on the first year of retention; however, after 2 years VFRs showed significantly greater failure rates. Contrarily, BRs presented greater failure rates in the lower arch than VFRs. LIMITATIONS: The findings of the included studies may be influenced by different factors related to the unpredictability of relapse. CONCLUSIONS: Most of the evidence generated in this systematic review derived from a moderate level of certainty. In the lower arch, BRs are more effective than VFRs to maintain treatment stability in the initial 6 months of retention and in the long term. In the upper arch, both retention protocols are equally effective. REGISTRATION: Regist0ration number: PROSPERO CRD42020199392. FUNDING: Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Educational Personnel (CAPES, Process code-001).

Mesioangulation of mandibular second molars: A case report.

This case report describes a simple alternative for treatment of mesioangulation of mandibular second molars. An 11-year-old girl was diagnosed with unilateral posterior crossbite, moderate incisor crowding and mesioangulation of the right mandibular second molar. The ectopic second molar was uprighted using a modified lingual arch with a distal hook and elastic chains. Orthodontic traction began after appliance installation and was activated once per month using 120 g of force. After six months, the right mandibular second molar was in an upright position. Orthodontic treatment continued with teeth levelling and alignment until acceptable occlusal and aesthetic results were achieved. Adequate stability was observed one year after debonding. The modified mandibular lingual arch with a distal hook is a simple and effective alternative to manage mesioangulation of mandibular second molars with minimum adverse effects and stable outcomes.

Late alveolar bone grafting in complete unilateral cleft lip and palate (UCLP): Biomechanical considerations for the success of orthodontic finishing.

Orthodontic treatment in patients with cleft lip and palate (CLP) is challenging. Alignment of the maxillary segments and orthodontic levelling of the teeth adjacent to the cleft area are important before alveolar bone grafting (ABG), in the permanent dentition. In this clinical report, orthodontic procedures, before and after late ABG, are described as an alternative that can optimise the orthodontic and periodontal results. The gingival margins of the teeth adjacent to the cleft area were levelled. Root divergence was corrected. Interdental papilla and improvement of the periodontal condition were obtained.

Short-term efficacy of vacuum-formed maintainer for deciduous second molar space maintenance in the mixed dentition: A single-centre, randomized controlled clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of vacuum-formed and banded space maintainers for deciduous second molar space maintenance during the mixed dentition. SETTING AND SAMPLE POPULATION: The study sample comprised thirty children in the mixed dentition (age range, 5.9 to 9.8 years) with early loss of at least one deciduous second molar. METHODS: This was a parallel-group, randomized, active-controlled clinical trial. Patients were randomly allocated to space maintenance performed with vacuum-formed or banded space maintainers with a 1:1 allocation ratio. The main outcome was any change in mesiodistal width of the extraction space. Secondary outcomes included the lingual rolling or axial rotation of the permanent first molar adjacent to the extraction site and extrusion of the antagonist tooth. Dental casts were obtained before appliance installation (T0), after 3 months (T1) and after 6 months (T2). Digital dental casts were measured using Dolphin 3D software. Chi-square, t test or Mann-Whitney and ANOVA or Friedman test were used for intra- and intergroup comparisons (P < .05). RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were similar between groups except for chronological age. Statistically, but not clinically significant space loss (mean, 0.32 mm; SD, ± 0.39) occurred with the vacuum-formed space maintainer only at the first trimester (T0-T1). Lingual rolling and axial rotation of the first permanent molar were not significant, as well as extrusion of the antagonist tooth. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study suggested that both tested devices were effective in maintaining space after early extraction of the deciduous second molar over a period of 6 months.

Stability of class II treatment with Pendulum and Jones jig followed by fixed appliances.

INTRODUCTION: The present study aimed to evaluate and compare the long-term stability of Class II correction with the Pendulum or Jones jig followed by fixed appliances. SETTINGS AND SAMPLE POPULATION: Group 1 comprised 20 Class II malocclusion patients with a mean initial age of 13.97 years (SD = 1.57), treated with Pendulum and fixed appliances for a mean period of 4.72 years (SD = 0.98), and mean long-term post-treatment evaluation of 4.72 years (SD = 0.97). Group 2 consisted of 18 Class II patients with a mean initial age of 13.19 years (SD = 1.26), treated with Jones jig and fixed appliances for a mean period of 3.96 years (SD = 0.92). Mean long-term post-treatment time was 5.50 years (SD = 1.57). METHODS: Lateral cephalograms were evaluated at three stages: initial (T1), final (T2) and long-term post-treatment (T3). Intragroup comparisons were performed with repeated measures ANOVA and Tukey's test and intergroup comparisons with independent t test. RESULTS: Many treatment changes were observed in both groups. From the long-term post-treatment periods, there was stability for most of the variables. Maxillary second molars and mandibular first molars extruded in the Jones jig group and slightly intruded in the Pendulum appliance group. The nasolabial angle decreased in the Pendulum group and increased in the Jones jig group. CONCLUSION: The correction of a Class II malocclusion was shown to be stable with similar long-term post-treatment results with Pendulum or Jones jig followed by fixed orthodontic appliances.

Prevention of non-cavitated lesions with fluoride and xylitol varnishes during orthodontic treatment: a randomized clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: Fixed orthodontic appliances impair oral hygiene increasing the risk of non-cavitated lesions (NCLs) and tooth decay. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of fluoride and xylitol varnishes in preventing NCLs during comprehensive orthodontic treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The sample comprised 55 volunteers from 15 to 20 years of age under orthodontic treatment that were randomly divided into three groups: Fluoride Group (FG; n=17), Xylitol Group (XG; n=19), and Placebo Group (PG; n=19). The patients in each group received two applications of the following varnishes: DuraphatTM (5% NaF), 20% xylitol, and placebo (no F/Xylitol) in the three groups, respectively. The varnishes were applied in the first appointment (T0) and 3 months later (T1). Clinical examinations were carried out at T0 and 6 months after (T2) using the ICDAS index and the QLF system (fluorescence difference). The intergroup comparisons were performed by ANOVA/Tukey's or Kruskal-Wallis/Dunn's tests (P<0.05). RESULTS: There was no significant intergroup difference regarding ICDAS index changes from T0 to T2. Fluoride varnish produced significantly greater increase in fluorescence of NCLs (mean change of -0.65 +0.78 and -0.56 +0.83, for maxilla and mandible, respectively) in comparison to the other groups. The majority of non-cavitated lesions improved in the fluoride and xylitol varnish groups. CONCLUSIONS: Fluoride varnish produced significantly greater increase in enamel fluorescence compared to xylitol and placebo varnishes. In short term, both fluoride and xylitol varnishes produced remineralization of NCLs in orthodontic patients. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Non-cavitated lesions can be effectively controlled in high-risk orthodontic patients by means of fluoride varnishes. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ReBEC Identifier: RBR-6mdxfq; Date of Register: March 19th, 2020. Retrospectively Registered.