Class II DIV 1 Correction during Adolescence: Non-Extraction with Acrylic Herbst or
Upper First Premolars Extraction
Rukh Baiz*, Anshul Singal and Sheetal Jha
Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, CCS University, India
*Corresponding Author: Rukh Baiz, Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, CCS University, India.
Received: May 15, 2023; Published: June 17, 2023
Introduction: Background: No two cases are alike. Different cases, different treatment approach. Class II div 1 malocclusion possesses a variety of conflicting treatment modalities. What is important to know is “ what suits a case best.”
Materials and Methods: In this study a comparative analysis is presented for 2 cases of class II malocclusion. For one, upper first pre molars are extracted. The second case was treated with fixed functional Herbst appliance. The decision to extract or not to extract depends on proper examination of the case and visualizing the outcome beforehand.
Purpose: The purpose of this article was to compare the outcome of treatment with modified Herbst and bilateral upper first premolar extractions in post pubertal patients with Class II malocclusion.
Keywords: Class II; Adolescence; Acrylic Herbst; Premolars Extraction
- Bishara SE. “Class II Malocclusions: Diagnostic and Clinical Considerations with and Without Treatment”. Seminars in Orthodontics 12 (2006): 11-24.
- Herbst E. “Dreissigjährige Erfahrungen mit dem Retentions-Scharnier”. Zahnärztl Rundschau 43 (1934): 1515-1524,1563-1568,1611-1616.
- Pancherz H. “Treatment of Class II malocclusions by jumping the bite with the Herbst appliance. A cephalometric investigation”. American Journal of Orthodontics 76 (1979): 423-442.
- Kingsley NW. “A Treatise on Oral Deformities as a Branch of Mechanical Surgery”. American Journal of Dental Science 12 (1880): 571.
- Bishara SE., et al. “Dentofacial and soft tissue changes in Class II, Division 1 cases treated with and without extractions”. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 107 (1995): 28-37.
- Janson G., et al. “Class II treatment success rate in 2- and 4-premolar extraction protocols”. American Journal of Orthodontics 4 (2004): 472-479.
- McNamara JA. “Fabrication of the acrylic splint Herbst appliance”. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics1 (1988): 10-18.
- Charlier JP., et al. “Effect of mandibular hyperpropulsion on the pew chondroblastic zone of young rat condyle”. American Journal of Orthodontics 55 (1969): 71-74.
- McNamara JA Jr and Bryan FA. “Long term mandibular adaptations to protrusive function: An experimental study in Macaca mulatta”. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 92 (1987): 98-108.
- Woodside DG., et al. “The influence of functional appliance therapy on glenoid fossa remodeling”. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 92 (1987): 181-198.
- Adams CD., et al. “Dentofacial remodelling produced by intermaxillary forces in Macaca mulatta”. Archives of Oral Biology 17 (1972): 1519-1535.
- Ramfjord SP and Blankenship JR. “Increased occlusal vertical dimension in adult monkeys”. Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry 45 (1981): 74-83.
- Hugo De Clerck and Hilde Timmerman. “Distalization of the maxillary arch with miniplate anchorage: Moschos A. “Papadopoulos, Skeletal Anchorage in Orthodontic Treatment of Class II Malocclusion: Mosby 22 (2015): 118-123.
- Herbst Ruf S and Pancherz H. “Dentoskeletal effects and facial profile changes in young adults treated with the Herbst appliance”. The Angle Orthodontist 3 (1999): 239-246.
- Ruf S and Pancherz H. “Temporomandibular joint growth adaptation in Herbst treatment. A prospective magnetic resonance graphic study”. European Journal of Orthodontics 20 (1998): 375-388.
- Ruf S and Pancherz H. “TMJ joint growth adaptation in young adults treated with Herbst appliance. A prospective MRI and cephalometric roentgenographic study”. European Journal of Orthodontics 30 (1998): 735-750.
- Brent Hassel and Allan G Farman. “Skeletal maturation evaluation using cervical vertebrae”. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 107 (1995): 58-66.
- Pancherz H. “The mechanism of class II correction in Herbst appliance treatment. A cephalometric investigation”. American Journal of Orthodontics 82 (1982): 104-113.
- Pancherz H and Anehus-Pancherz M. “Facial profile changes during and after Herbst appliance treatment”. European Journal of Orthodontics 16 (1994): 275-286.
- Janson G., et al. “Treatment stability in patients with Class II malocclusion treated with 2 maxillary premolar extractions or without extractions”. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 138 (2010): 16-22.