Dentoskeletal Effects of 2-Phase Treatment Versus 1-Phase Treatment With Extraction of 4 First Premolars in Nonhypodivergent Class II Patients

    loading  Checking for direct PDF access through Ovid


BackgroundThe aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of 2-phase (a first phase with Twin Block therapy immediately followed by a second phase with fixed appliance therapy with nonextraction) and 1-phase (fixed appliance therapy with extraction of 4 first premolars) treatment of class II division 1 malocclusion.MethodsTwo groups of successfully treated subjects, aged 10 to 14 years with class II division 1 malocclusion, were evaluated: 2-phase group (n = 70) and 1-phase group (n = 76). Pretreatment and posttreatment lateral cephalograms were traced manually and subjected to Student t test.ResultsIn the 2-phase group, the forward positioning of the mandible (Pg-Olp) was less than that of the extraction group. The sagittal mandibular forward growth (Pg-Olp) was, on average, 2.39 ± 0.4 mm in the 2-phase group and 4.56 ± 2.51 mm in the 1-phase group (P = 0.008, P < 0.05). In the vertical plane, the increases in lower facial height and mandibular plane angle were greater in the 2-phase treatment. In the 2-phase group, the lower anterior teeth proclined (Ii-MP) by 7.3 ± 2 degrees, and in the extraction treatment group, it changed −4.1 ± 3.6 degrees. The 1-phase group contributed more sagittal orthopedic effects than did the 2-phase group.ConclusionsThe proclination of the mandibular incisors in the 2-phase group might restrain the mandibular bone from growing enough and cause the backward and downward rotation of the mandible.

    loading  Loading Related Articles