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.

Efficacy of Low-Level Laser Therapy in Reducing Pain in the Initial Stages of Orthodontic Treatment.

Purpose: There is no consensus about the mechanism and efficacy in alleviating pain of the lower-level laser therapy (LLLT) during orthodontic treatment. This study aimed to evaluate the LLLT effectiveness clinically in reducing pain caused by orthodontic movement that occurs in the early stages of treatment. Methods: The sample consisted of 54 patients in need of orthodontic treatment divided into two groups. A 28 experimental patients group (initial mean age: 26.84 years old) was undergone gallium-aluminum-arsenide infrared laser application on 12 points for each tooth immediately after the installation of the first alignment archwire, and a 26 patients control group (initial mean age: 29.13 years old) was undergone to no pain control intervention at all. Pain intensity was measured by using a visual analog scale, which was marked pain level (mm) reported in 06, 24, 48, and 72 hours. The perception of pain (beginning, peak, decline, and absence) was evaluated by filling up a questionnaire. To compare the intensity and perception of pain between groups, a nonparametric Mann-Whitney has been performed. Results: The experimental group showed levels (mm) at 6 (p < 0.001), 24 (p=0.004), and 48 hours (p=0.007) and perception of pain (hours) in the peak (p=0.026), decline (p=0.025), and absence (p=0.008) significantly lower compared to the group control. Conclusion: Low-level laser therapy is effective in reducing pain severity caused by orthodontic forces activation, and it promotes the analgesic action lasting effect during the most painful feeling time.

Stability of Class II malocclusion treatment with the distal jet followed by fixed appliances.

INTRODUCTION: This retrospective study aimed to assess the stability of Class II malocclusion treatment with the distal jet, followed by fixed appliances. METHODS: Seventy-five cephalograms of 30 subjects were divided into 2 groups. The treated group consisted of 15 patients who were evaluated at the pretreatment, posttreatment, and long-term posttreatment stages. The control group consisted of 15 subjects with normal occlusion, comparable to the experimental group at the long-term posttreatment period. Intergroup comparison of posttreatment changes was evaluated with t tests. RESULTS: In the long-term posttreatment period, there was no significant change in the anteroposterior position of the maxilla and mandible to the cranial base. The lower anterior face height had a significantly smaller increase in the treated than in the control group. The maxillary molars in the treated group had significantly smaller vertical development, and the mandibular incisors had significantly greater labial tipping and protrusion than the control group. The treatment produced significant improvement in molar relationship and reduction of overbite and overjet, which remained stable in the long-term posttreatment period. There was greater upper lip protrusion in the experimental than in the control group in the long-term posttreatment period. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of Class II malocclusions with the distal jet, followed by fixed appliances, showed good long-term stability in molar relationship, overbite, and overjet.