Changes in the upper airway, hyoid bone and craniofacial morphology between patients treated with headgear activator and Herbst appliance: A retrospective study on lateral cephalometry.

BACKGROUND: The present study compared the treatment changes in the upper airway, hyoid bone position and craniofacial morphology between two groups of children with skeletal class II malocclusion treated with the headgear activator (HGA) and Herbst appliance (Herbst). SETTING AND SAMPLE POPULATION: Orthodontic population from the Faculty of Dentistry of the University of Hong Kong. METHODS: Thirty-four skeletal class II patients treated with the HGA (17 patients, mean age 10.6 ± 1.5 years) and the Herbst (17 patients, mean age 11.0 ± 1.4 years) were matched for sex, age, overjet, skeletal class and mandibular divergence. The patients received lateral cephalometric radiographs (LCRs) at the beginning of treatment (T1 ), after treatment (T2 ) and at follow-up (T3 ). In the HGA group, patients underwent LCRs 7 months before the beginning of treatment (T0 ), which were used as growth reference for intra-group comparison. Paired Student's t tests were used for intra- and inter-group comparisons (α = .05). RESULTS: Treatment changes (T2 -T1 ) did not differ significantly between the groups. However, at follow-up (T3 -T1 ) the Herbst group showed a smaller increase than the HGA group in the vertical position of the hyoid bone relative to the Frankfort plane (P = .013) and mandibular plane (P = .013). CONCLUSIONS: There were no significant differences in the upper airway, hyoid bone position and craniofacial morphology between the groups at the end of treatment. However, the Herbst may provide better long-term control of the vertical position of the hyoid bone than the HGA in children with skeletal class II malocclusion.

From Endodontic Therapy to Regenerative Endodontics: New Wine in Old Bottles.

The concept of regenerative endodontics wherein one can replace damaged pulp structures and recuperate the functionality in erstwhile necrotic and infected root canal systems has been a cutting-edge technology. Though the notion started as early as the 1960s, even before the discovery of stem cells and regenerative medicine, it was in the 2000s that this procedure gained momentum. Ever since then, researchers continue to discover its essential benefit to immature teeth and its ability to overcome the caveats of endodontic therapy, which is commonly known as root canal treatment. Further, through this therapy, one can redevelop root even in immature teeth with necrotic pulps, which overall helps in maintaining skeletal and dental development. Past literature indicates that regenerative endodontic procedures seem to be successful, especially when compared with other conventional techniques such as Mineral Trioxide Aggregate apexification. Besides, many clinicians have begun to apply regenerative endodontic procedures to mature teeth in adult patients, with several clinical case reports that have shown complete resolution of signs and symptoms of pulp necrosis. Generally, the three most desirable outcomes anticipated by clinicians from this procedure include resolution of clinical signs and symptoms, root maturation and redevelopment of the neurogenesis process. Despite this, whether these objectives and true regeneration of the pulp/dentin complex are achieved is still a question mark. Following the discovery that regenerative endodontics indeed is a stem cell-based treatment, addressing the fundamental issue surrounding stem cells might assist in achieving all identified clinical outcomes while favoring tissue formation that closely resembles the pulp-dentin complex.