Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
: the purpose of this study was to evaluate the dento-skeletal effects of the mini-implant supported Twin Block versus the incisal capped appliance in the treatment of skeletal class II patients with mandibular retrognathism.
Methods: Twenty patients with skeletal class II mandibular retrusion were included in the study. They were recruited with a random and equal allocation into 2 groups. The first group was treated with incisal capped TB without skeletal anchorage. The second group were treated with mini-implant supported TB. The mini-implants were inserted in the inter-radicular region between the mandibular second premolar and first molar. Intra-oral elastics were attached from the mini-implant to the wire hook in the canine region of the lower part of the TB and they were changed every 24 hrs. 100 to 150 gm of force was applied. Cephalometric radiographs were acquired at the beginning (T1) and end of treatment (T2). The paired-samples and independent-samples t-tests were used to evaluate and compare the changes within groups and between groups, respectively.
Twenty patients with skeletal class II mandibular retrusion were included in the study. They were recruited with a random and equal allocation into 2 groups. The first group was treated with incisal capped TB without skeletal anchorage. The second group were treated with mini-implant supported TB
Appliance construction:
Bite registration
Design of the appliance A-modified twin block The incisal capped Twin Block, which was used for the first group composed of two parts. The upper part had labial bow over labial surface of upper anterior teeth using Adam and ball clasps for retention.
The lower part included ball clasp between lower anterior teeth and Adam clasp on lower first premolar with the additional modifications:
This appliance was constructed as the modified Twin Block used for the first group in addition to the following modifications:
Insertion of the Mini-implants:
Delivery of appliance and patient instruction:
The appliance was checked for fitting in the patient's mouth systemically, in the upper jaw then in the lower jaw separately and then the two parts were checked together when the jaws were closed. We checked the presence of any roughness, sharp areas or undercuts that may cause discomfort to the patients.
The patients and parents were instructed to:
Retention When the overjet was corrected; a retention appliance was constructed to correct lateral open bite that resulted from presence of occlusal bite blocks.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| incisal capped twin block | Active Comparator | The incisal capped Twin Block, which was used for the first group composed of two parts. The upper part had labial bow over labial surface of upper anterior teeth using Adam and ball clasps for retention. The lower part included ball clasp between lower anterior teeth and Adam clasp on lower first premolar with the additional modifications:
|
|
| skeletal anchored twin block | Active Comparator | This appliance was constructed as the modified Twin Block used for the incisal capped appliance in addition to the following modifications:
|
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| skeletal anchored twin block | Device | This appliance was constructed as the modified Twin Block used for the first group in addition to the following modifications:
|
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| dentoskeletal effects of skeletal anchored versus incisal capped twin block appliance in the correction of skeletal class II malocclusion | the study include 20 patients with skeletal class II malocclusion who were treated with incisal capped and skeletal anchored twin block advancement of mandible with controlling the position of lower incisors in the second group | 11 months |
Not provided
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Asmaa A Elabd, master | mansoura univeristy | Principal Investigator |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dentistry | Al Mansurah | 35516 | Egypt |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D057887 | Overbite |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D008312 | Malocclusion, Angle Class II |
| D008310 | Malocclusion |
| D014076 | Tooth Diseases |
| D009057 | Stomatognathic Diseases |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
|