The Use of Pendulum Appliance in the Treatment of Class II Malocclusion

Wong, A.; Rabie, A.; Hägg, U.

doi:10.1038/sj.bdj.4800281a

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The response differs between individuals with a low and a high mandibular plane angle. 31 Other advantages include ease of fabrication, one-time activation, adjustment of the springs if necessary to correct minor transverse and vertical molar positions, and patient acceptance. 29 A common finding in studies that have evaluated the pendulum appliance is distal tipping of the maxillary first molars and anterior tipping of the premolars.…”

Section: Pendulum Appliancementioning

confidence: 99%

Nonextraction Class II Correction

Nanda¹,

Dandajena²,

Nanda³

2015

Esthetics and Biomechanics in Orthodontics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Pendulum Appliancementioning

confidence: 99%

Nonextraction Class II Correction

Nanda¹,

Dandajena²,

Nanda³

2015

Esthetics and Biomechanics in Orthodontics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…29,30 Table 9-1 shows some of the results observed from a cephalometric analysis of patients treated with the pendulum appliance. 31 Other advantages include ease of fabrication, one-time activation, adjustment of the springs if necessary to correct minor transverse and vertical molar positions, and patient acceptance. In another study, patients in the angle >25 o group showed an increase in the lower anterior vertical height (4.13 mm) that was greater than in the patients in the low and average groups (1.97 and 2.84 mm, respectively).…”

Section: Pendulum Appliancementioning

confidence: 99%

Biomechanic Strategies for Nonextraction Class II Malocclusions

Nanda¹,

Dandajena²,

Nanda³

2005

Biomechanics and Esthetic Strategies in Clinical Orthodontics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Molar distalization with a pendulum appliance K-loop combination

Açar¹,

Gürsoy²,

Dinçer³

2010

Eur J Orthod

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to evaluate the dentoalveolar effects of a pendulum appliance supported buccally by a K-loop, and to compare these with a cervical headgear (CHG) group. The records of 30 patients with skeletal Class I and dental Class II malocclusions were divided in to two groups: Patients in group 1 (seven females and eight males; mean age, 15.0 +/- 3.4 years) were treated with a pendulum appliance supported with a K-loop buccally, while in group 2 (10 females and 5 males; mean age, 14.2 +/- 2.9 years), the patients were treated with CHG. Standardized lateral cephalograms and study models were taken at the beginning of treatment (T0) and at the end of distal molar movement (T1). T0-T1 changes within the groups were analysed with a paired t-test, and between the groups with a t-test. The mean amount of distalization was 4.53 +/- 1.46 mm in group 1 and 2.23 +/- 1.68 mm in group 2. The mean amount of distal tipping for group 1 was 5.13 +/- 4.90 degrees; the mean amount of mesial tipping for group 2 was 0.80 +/- 2.27 degrees. Intrusion and mesiobuccal rotation of the maxillary molars were achieved in both groups. In group 1, the amount of labial protrusion and tipping of the maxillary incisors was not statistically significant. In group 2, palatoversion and retrusion of the maxillary incisors was statistically significant (P < 0.01 and P < 0.001, respectively). The two major disadvantages of intraoral appliances, which are distal tipping of molars and loss of anchorage at the anterior teeth, were significantly decreased with the use of a pendulum appliance K-loop combination.

show abstract

The Use of Pendulum Appliance in the Treatment of Class II Malocclusion

Cited by 4 publications

References 8 publications

Nonextraction Class II Correction

Nonextraction Class II Correction

Biomechanic Strategies for Nonextraction Class II Malocclusions

Molar distalization with a pendulum appliance K-loop combination

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About