Comparison between an Acrylic Splint Herbst and an Acrylic Splint Miniscrew-Herbst for Mandibular Incisors Proclination Control

Abstract

Aim. The aim of this study is to compare dental and skeletal effects produced by an acrylic splint Herbst with and without skeletal anchorage for correction of dental class II malocclusion. Methods. The test group was formed by 14 patients that were treated with an acrylic splint miniscrew-Herbst; miniscrews were placed between mandibular second premolars and first molars; controls also consisted of 14 subjects that were treated with an acrylic splint Herbst and no miniscrews. Cephalometric measurements before and after Herbst treatment were compared. The value of α for significance was set at 0.05. Results. All subjects from both groups were successfully treated to a bilateral Class I relationship; mean treatment time was 8,1 months in the test group and 7.8 in the controls. Several variables did not have a statistical significant difference between the two groups. Some of the variables, instead, presented a significant difference such as incisor flaring, mandibular bone base position, and skeletal discrepancy. Conclusions. This study showed that the Herbst appliance associated to miniscrews allowed a better control of the incisor flaring with a greater mandibular skeletal effect.

Evaluation of the miniplate-anchored Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device in skeletal Class II growing subjects: A randomized controlled trial

“…Power and sample size calculation (PS) software (Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tenn) was used. It was based on the work of Manni et al, 17 who reported a 3.7 6 2.26 mm difference in the mandibular length. When the power was set at 90%, the required sample size was found to be 11 subjects per group.…”

Evaluation of Dentoskeletal Changes Accompanying the Treatment of Class II Malocclusion by Advansync Appliance versus Intermaxillary Coil Spring Mechanics

“…The use of fixed functional appliances in particular has the advantages of requiring minimal patient compliance and ensuring a constant anterior positioning of the mandible during the treatment period (22,23) . One of the commonly used rigid fixed functional appliances is the Herbst appliance, where several studies have investigated its effects and compared it to the effects of other functional appliances (24)(25)(26)(27) .…”

Buccal bone graft with surgically assisted rapid maxillary expansion in young adults: a cone beam computerized tomographic study

“…The sample size calculation was based on a study by Manni et al 29 who compared the use of Herbst appliance with and without mini screw anchorage and reported a significant increase in the Herbst mini screw group over their control group. The mean change in the mandibular length in the treatment and control groups were 4.6±2.43 mm and 0.9±2.09 mm respectively.…”