Orthodontic treatment for prominent upper front teeth (Class II malocclusion) in children

Thiruvenkatachari, Badri; Harrison, Jayne E; Worthington, Helen V; O’Brien, Kevin

doi:10.1002/14651858.cd003452.pub3

Cited by 77 publications

(97 citation statements)

References 103 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Taken individually none of these studies found any difference in the incidence of trauma between those patients who had undergone early treatment and patients who had undergone comprehensive treatment in adolescence. [15][16][17] A recent systematic review has combined the results for the three studies and found a small, but statistically significant difference, with the early treatment group experiencing less trauma; 18 however the authors of one of the original studies noted that most of the trauma experienced was minor and in order to reduce the risk of trauma, orthodontic treatment would need to be started in the early mixed dentition stage, fairly soon after the maxillary incisors had erupted, in all children with an increased overjet. 15 Considering the greater financial burden it would incur to treat all these children, it is probably not cost effective in the majority of cases.…”

Section: Prevention Of Dentoalveolar Traumamentioning

confidence: 99%

What is the value of orthodontic treatment?

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryOrthodontic treatment is as popular as ever. Orthodontists frequently have long lists of people wanting treatment and the cost to the NHS in England was £261m in 2013-14 (approximately 11% of the NHS annual spend on dentistry). It is important that clinicians and healthcare commissioners constantly question the contribution of interventions towards improving the health of the population. In this article the authors outline some of the evidence for and against the claims that people with a malocclusion are at a disadvantage compared with those without a malocclusion and that orthodontic treatment has significant health benefits. The authors would like to point out that this is not a comprehensive and systematic review of the entire scientific literature. Rather the evidence is presented in order to stimulate discussion and debate.

show abstract

Section: Prevention Of Dentoalveolar Traumamentioning

confidence: 99%

What is the value of orthodontic treatment?

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…30,31 In particular, optimal timing for functional/ orthopedic treatment for skeletal Class II and Class III has been reported to be late [32][33][34] and early, 2 respectively.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sagittal and vertical craniofacial growth and attainment of circumpubertal middle phalanx maturation (MPM) stages: A multiple regression study

Perinetti¹,

Sverko²,

Borgo³

et al. 2018

sejodr

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Orthodontic treatment for most of the skeletal malocclusions have specific optimal timing according to the skeletal maturation phases. The knowledge of whether attainment of a specific maturation phase is associated with the different sagittal and vertical craniofacial growth pattern then becomes of clinical relevance.Aim: This cross-sectional study evaluated whether sagittal and vertical craniofacial growth pattern, has an association with the age of attainment of the circumpubertal skeletal maturation phases. Materials and methods:A total of 300 subjects (170 females and 130 males) were included in the study (mean age, 12.0 ±1.5 years; range, 8.3-15.6 years). These subjects were equally distributed in the circumpubertal middle phalanx maturation (MPM) stages 2, 3 and 4. Subsequently, multiple regression models were run for each MPM stage group to assess the significance of the association of cephalometric parameters (SNA, SNB, ANB, PP/MP, CoGoMe, SN/MP and NSBa angles) with age of attainment of the corresponding MPM stage (in months).Results: Only sex yielded significant associations, with females having anticipated attainment of each of the circumpubertal MPM stage. Conclusion:These results show no significant correlations of the different sagittal and vertical cephalometric parameters with the age of attainment of the circumpubertal skeletal maturation phases. 12South Eur J Orthod Dentofac Res Perinetti G. et al. MPM and craniofacial growth

show abstract

“…2 However, contrasting recommendations have been carried out from current research regarding the reliability of such methods. 3,4 Studies on the radiographical growth indicators are essentially of two types: the ones correlating the various stages of maturation with mandibular growth spurt, 5 and the ones evaluating skeletal effects obtained by functional treatment in Class II patients the timing of treatment has been based on such indicators (for review, see Perinetti et al 4 ) Interestingly, while many of the former types of investigations reported poor correlation between the stages of growth indicators (mainly the CVM) and mandibular growth spurt, 6 most of the latter type of investigations reported clinically relevant favourable effects when the growth indicators are used. 4 It is perhaps that investigations are still missing the relevant piece of evidence.…”

Section: Clinical Articlementioning

confidence: 99%

Radiographic growth indicators: The issue of diagnostic reliability and clinical feasibility

Perinetti

Contardo

2017

sejodr

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The use of radiographic growth indicators, such as the hand-and-wrist maturation (HWM) and cervical vertebral maturation (CVM) methods, has been recommended in previous clinical trials on the skeletal effects obtained by functional treatment in growing Class II patients. The concept behind the use of indicators resides in the identification of the pubertal growth spurt in individual patients allowing the delivery of the treatment at this specific stage of skeletal maturation when the mandible response is expected to be maximum growth. Interestingly, while many of the former types of investigations reported a poor correlation between the stages of growth indicators (mainly the CVM) and mandibular growth spurt, most of the latter type of investigations reported clinically relevant favorable effects when the growth indicators are used. It is perhaps that investigations are still missing the relevant piece of evidence. The first critical issue relates to the correlation between two variables (i.e., stages of maturation and mandibular growth) that does not imply diagnostic accuracy, as it has been extensively reported for the case of dental maturation. The other relevant issue relates to the clinical feasibility of the repetition of the recording when dealing with invasive methods based on X-rays, irrespective of whether the methods are accurate. Meanwhile, more opportunity will be given by the use of non-invasive (serum or GCF) biomarkers. According to all these considerations, more reports will be necessary to elucidate the role of the growth indicators in orthodontics fully.

show abstract

Orthodontic treatment for prominent upper front teeth (Class II malocclusion) in children

Abstract: Orthodontic treatment for prominent upper front teeth (Class II malocclusion) in children.

Cited by 77 publications

References 103 publications

What is the value of orthodontic treatment?

What is the value of orthodontic treatment?

Sagittal and vertical craniofacial growth and attainment of circumpubertal middle phalanx maturation (MPM) stages: A multiple regression study

Radiographic growth indicators: The issue of diagnostic reliability and clinical feasibility

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About