Cephalometric Changes in Growing Patients with Increased Vertical Dimension Treated with Cervical Headgear

Overview

Journal J Orofac Orthop

Specialty Dentistry

Date 2017 Apr 30

PMID 28455746

Citations 10

Authors

Sergio Sambataro

Rosamaria Fastuca

Nelson J Oppermann

Paola Lorusso

Tiziano Baccetti

Lorenzo Franchi

Alberto Caprioglio

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Purpose: The aim of the present study was to investigate the cephalometric changes in patients with increased vertical dimension after treatment with cervical headgear compared to controls.

Methods: The sample of the present retrospective study consisted of 20 Class II patients (10 males, 10 females; mean age 8.54 ± 1.15 years) with increased vertical dimension treated with cervical headgear (treatment group) and 21 Class II patients (11 males, 10 females; mean age 8.41 ± 1.15 years) with increased vertical dimension who underwent no treatment (control group). Cephalograms were available for each subject at baseline (T1) and after treatment/observation time (T2) for both groups and cephalometric analysis allowed for evaluation of changes between time points and between groups.

Results: Regarding facial axis, N-ANS/ANS-Me, and overbite, there were no negatively significant changes in the treated group showing no significant worsening in the vertical dimension. Regarding facial angle, there was a significant increase in the treated group between the time points and when compared to the control group, showing counterclockwise rotation of the mandible in the treated group.

Conclusions: The vertical dimension was not significantly altered after cervical headgear treatment although the anterior facial height was higher at the beginning of treatment. There was significant counterclockwise rotation of the mandible, and clockwise rotation and distal displacement of the maxilla after treatment.

Citing Articles

Impact of Different Orthodontic Appliances on Mandibular Condyle, Anterior Region of Mandibular, and Maxillary Sinus Using Panoramic Radiography.

Yuzbasioglu Ertugrul B Med Sci Monit. 2024; 30:e946265.

PMID: 39533669 PMC: 11572759. DOI: 10.12659/MSM.946265.

Vertical effects of cervical headgear in growing patients with Class II malocclusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Hussain U, Shah A, Rabi F, Campobasso A, Papageorgiou S Eur J Orthod. 2023; 46(1).

PMID: 37866376 PMC: 10783157. DOI: 10.1093/ejo/cjad053.

Treatment outcome of class II malocclusion therapy including extraction of maxillary first molars: a cephalometric comparison between normodivergent and hyperdivergent facial types.

Booij J, Fontana M, Serafin M, Fastuca R, Kuijpers-Jagtman A, Caprioglio A PeerJ. 2022; 10:e14537.

PMID: 36530416 PMC: 9753754. DOI: 10.7717/peerj.14537.

Skeletal, Dental and Soft Tissue Cephalometric Changes after Orthodontic Treatment of Dental Class II Malocclusion with Maxillary First Molar or First Premolar Extractions.

Booij J, Serafin M, Fastuca R, Kuijpers-Jagtman A, Caprioglio A J Clin Med. 2022; 11(11).

PMID: 35683555 PMC: 9181379. DOI: 10.3390/jcm11113170.

The Effect of Different Condition of Pulpal Pressure on Microtensile Bond Strength of Several Dentin Bonding Agents on Deep and Superficial Dentin.

Montanari M, Fiorillo L, Cervino G, Sambataro S, Herford A, Cicciu M Materials (Basel). 2021; 14(20).

PMID: 34683790 PMC: 8541316. DOI: 10.3390/ma14206200.

References

Haralabakis N, Sifakakis I . The effect of cervical headgear on patients with high or low mandibular plane angles and the "myth" of posterior mandibular rotation. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2004; 126(3):310-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2003.08.028. View

Fastuca R, Perinetti G, Zecca P, Nucera R, Caprioglio A . Airway compartments volume and oxygen saturation changes after rapid maxillary expansion: a longitudinal correlation study. Angle Orthod. 2015; 85(6):955-61. PMC: 8612044. DOI: 10.2319/072014-504.1. View

Bianchi B, Ferri A, Brevi B, Di Blasio A, Copelli C, Di Blasio C . Orthognathic surgery for the complete rehabilitation of Moebius patients: principles, timing and our experience. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2012; 41(1):e1-4. DOI: 10.1016/j.jcms.2012.07.002. View

Alio-Sanz J, Iglesias-Conde C, Lorenzo-Pernia J, Iglesias-Linares A, Mendoza-Mendoza A, Solano-Reina E . Effects on the maxilla and cranial base caused by cervical headgear: a longitudinal study. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2012; 17(5):e845-51. PMC: 3482532. DOI: 10.4317/medoral.17698. View

Gautam P, Valiathan A, Adhikari R . Craniofacial displacement in response to varying headgear forces evaluated biomechanically with finite element analysis. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2009; 135(4):507-15. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2007.02.059. View

Gkantidis N, Halazonetis D, Alexandropoulos E, Haralabakis N . Treatment strategies for patients with hyperdivergent Class II Division 1 malocclusion: is vertical dimension affected?. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2011; 140(3):346-55. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2011.05.015. View

Kuhn R . Control of anterior vertical dimension and proper selection of extraoral anchorage. Angle Orthod. 1968; 38(4):340-9. DOI: 10.1043/0003-3219(1968)038<0340:COAVDA>2.0.CO;2. View

Strajnic L, Stanisic-Sinobad D, Markovic D, Stojanovic L . Cephalometric indicators of the vertical dimension of occlusion. Coll Antropol. 2008; 32(2):535-41. View

Di Blasio A, Mandelli G, Generali I, Gandolfini M . Facial aesthetics and childhood. Eur J Paediatr Dent. 2009; 10(3):131-4. View

10.

Godt A, Berneburg M, Kalwitzki M, Goz G . Cephalometric analysis of molar and anterior tooth movement during cervical headgear treatment in relation to growth patterns. J Orofac Orthop. 2008; 69(3):189-200. DOI: 10.1007/s00056-008-0641-9. View

11.

COOK A, Sellke T, BeGole E . Control of the vertical dimension in Class II correction using a cervical headgear and lower utility arch in growing patients. Part I. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1994; 106(4):376-88. DOI: 10.1016/S0889-5406(94)70059-1. View

12.

Anghinoni M, Magri A, Di Blasio A, Toma L, Sesenna E . Midline mandibular osteotomy in an asymmetric patient. Angle Orthod. 2009; 79(5):1008-14. DOI: 10.2319/102908-550.1. View

13.

Antonarakis G, Kiliaridis S . Treating Class II malocclusion in children. Vertical skeletal effects of high-pull or low-pull headgear during comprehensive orthodontic treatment and retention. Orthod Craniofac Res. 2014; 18(2):86-95. DOI: 10.1111/ocr.12062. View

14.

Melsen B . Effects of cervical anchorage during and after treatment: an implant study. Am J Orthod. 1978; 73(5):526-40. DOI: 10.1016/0002-9416(78)90242-7. View

15.

BENCH R, Gugino C, Hilgers J . Bioprogressive therapy. Part 7. J Clin Orthod. 1978; 12(3):192-207. View

16.

Cassi D, De Biase C, Tonni I, Gandolfini M, Di Blasio A, Piancino M . Natural position of the head: review of two-dimensional and three-dimensional methods of recording. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2016; 54(3):233-40. DOI: 10.1016/j.bjoms.2016.01.025. View

17.

BENCH R, Gugino C, Hilgers J . Bio-progressive therapy. J Clin Orthod. 1977; 11(10):661-71, 674-82 contd. View

18.

Baumrind S, Korn E, ISAACSON R, West E, Molthen R . Quantitative analysis of the orthodontic and orthopedic effects of maxillary traction. Am J Orthod. 1983; 84(5):384-98. DOI: 10.1016/0002-9416(93)90002-o. View

19.

Fastuca R, Zecca P, Caprioglio A . Role of mandibular displacement and airway size in improving breathing after rapid maxillary expansion. Prog Orthod. 2014; 15(1):40. PMC: 4047764. DOI: 10.1186/s40510-014-0040-2. View

20.

Hubbard G, NANDA R, Currier G . A cephalometric evaluation of nonextraction cervical headgear treatment in Class II malocclusions. Angle Orthod. 1994; 64(5):359-70. DOI: 10.1043/0003-3219(1994)064<0359:ACEONC>2.0.CO;2. View