Effects of Removable Functional Appliances on the Dentoalveolar Unit in Growing Patients.

Background and Objectives: The objective of this retrospective controlled study is to compare class II growing patients who underwent treatment with two different functional appliances: the Fraenkel regulator (FR-2), utilized as the control group, and the elastodontic device "Cranium Occluded Postural Multifunctional Harmonizers" (AMCOP), utilized as the test group. Materials and Methods: The study sample consisted of 52 patients with class II division I malocclusion (30 males, 22 females, mean age 8.6 ± 1.4 years) who were treated with the two different types of appliances: Group 1 (n = 27, mean age 8 [7.00, 9.00] years, 12 females, 15 males) received treatment with AMCOP, while Group 2 (n = 25, mean age 9.2 years [8.20, 10.00], 10 females, 15 males) received treatment with FR-2. The mean treatment duration for Group 1 was 28.00 [21.50, 38.00] months, while for Group 2 it was 23.70 [17.80, 27.40] months. Cephalometric analyses were performed on lateral cephalograms taken before treatment (T1) and after treatment (T2). Results: Significant intragroup differences were observed over time in Group 1 for 1^/PP. Similarly, significant intragroup differences were observed over time in Group 2 for SNB, ANB, and IMPA. Conclusions: Both treatment modalities resulted in the correction of class II malocclusion with dentoalveolar compensation, although the treatment duration with AMCOP tended to be longer on average.

Three-dimensional comparison of bone-borne and tooth-bone-borne maxillary expansion in young adults with maxillary skeletal deficiency.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the transverse dental and skeletal changes in patients treated with bone-anchored palatal expander (bone-borne, BB) compared to patients treated with tooth and bone-anchored palatal expanders (tooth-bone-borne, TBB) using cone-beam computer tomography (CBCT) and 3D image analysis. METHODS: The sample comprised 30 patients with transverse maxillary discrepancy treated with two different types of appliances: bone-borne (Group BB) and tooth-bone-borne (Group TBB) expanders. CBCT scans were acquired before (T1) and after completion of maxillary expansion (T2); the interval was 5.4 ± 3.4 and 6.2 ± 2.1 months between the T1 and the T2 scans of Group TBB (tooth-bone-borne) and Group BB (bone-borne), respectively. Transverse, anteroposterior and vertical linear and angular three-dimensional dentoskeletal changes were assessed after cranial base superimposition. RESULTS: Both groups displayed marked transverse skeletal expansion with a greater ratio of skeletal to dental changes. Greater changes at the nasal cavity, zygoma and orbital levels were found in Group BB. A relatively parallel sutural opening in an anterior-posterior direction was observed in Group TBB; however, the Group BB presented a somewhat triangular (V-shaped) opening of the suture that was wider anteriorly. Small downward-forward displacements were observed in both groups. Asymmetric expansion occurred in approximately 50% of the patients in both groups. CONCLUSION: Greater skeletal vs dental expansion ratio and expansion of the circummaxillary regions were found in Group BB, the group in which a bone-borne expander was used. Both groups presented skeletal and dental changes, with a similar amount of posterior palate expansion. Asymmetric expansion was observed in both groups.