Comparison of the Effects of Rapid Maxillary Expansion Versus Twin Block Appliance on Mandibular Growth in Skeletal Class II Patients

Overview

Journal BMC Oral Health

Publisher Biomed Central

Specialty Dentistry

Date 2020 Dec 2

PMID 33261594

Citations 3

Authors

Jia-Nan Zhang

Si Chen

Cheng-Yi Huang

Chong Zhong

Jing Jin

Feng-Yang Yu

Zan-Zan Zhang

Hai-Ping Lu

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: This is a retrospective study that compares mandibular growth changes in skeletal Class II patients treated by rapid maxillary expansion (RME) and following fixed appliance with those patients treated by Twin-Block (TB) and following fixed appliance.

Methods: Fourteen patients treated by RME and following fixed appliance were included into the RME group. Fifteen patients treated by Twin-Block and following fixed appliance were included into the TB group. Lateral cephalometric radiographs taken before treatment and immediately after fixed appliance treatment were used to evaluate mandibular growth effects.

Results: The starting forms of the patients in the two groups were examined to be of good comparability. The mandibular length increased significantly in both groups as measured by Co-Gn, Go-Gn and Ar-Gn, but the TB group didn't show more mandibular growth than the RME group (P > 0.05). Skeletal changes of the mandible in vertical dimension were different in the two groups. The change in FMA was 0.35° in the RME group, while the change was 2.65° in the TB group (P < 0.001). The change in LAFH was 5.14 mm in the RME group, significantly smaller than the change of 10.19 mm in the TB group (P < 0.001).

Conclusion: The investigated Phase I treatment with RME followed by Phase II treatment of fixed appliance achieved the same increases in sagittal mandibular growth and facial profile improvements as the Twin-Block therapy. The treatment with RME followed by fixed appliance was better for vertical control, while the treatment with Twin-Block followed by fixed appliance significantly increased the mandibular plane angle.

Citing Articles

Clinical effects of twin-block combined with maxillary expansion on the upper airway in adolescents with Class II malocclusion.

Zhao H, Sun R, Cao S, Han J Clin Oral Investig. 2024; 28(8):442.

PMID: 39046570 DOI: 10.1007/s00784-024-05837-6.

Efficacy of a modified twin block appliance compared with the traditional twin block appliance in children with hyperdivergent mandibular retrognathia: protocol for a single-centre, single-blind, randomised controlled trial.

Liu A, Zhang W, Zhang W, Shi S, Chen Z, Liu Y BMJ Open. 2023; 13(11):e071959.

PMID: 38011986 PMC: 10685957. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-071959.

Changes in the Mandible Following Rapid Maxillary Expansion in Children with Class II Malocclusion: A Systematic Review.

Kotarska M, Kucukkeles N, Lis J, Kawala B, Rumin K, Sarul M Diagnostics (Basel). 2022; 12(7).

PMID: 35885592 PMC: 9319810. DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics12071688.

References

Arat F, Arat Z, Tompson B, Tanju S, Erden I . Muscular and condylar response to rapid maxillary expansion. Part 2: magnetic resonance imaging study of the temporomandibular joint. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2008; 133(6):823-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.07.029. View

Lima Filho R, Lima A, Carlos de Oliveira Ruellas A . Spontaneous correction of Class II malocclusion after rapid palatal expansion. Angle Orthod. 2004; 73(6):745-52. DOI: 10.1043/0003-3219(2003)073<0745:SCOCIM>2.0.CO;2. View

Khoja A, Fida M, Shaikh A . Cephalometric evaluation of the effects of the Twin Block appliance in subjects with Class II, Division 1 malocclusion amongst different cervical vertebral maturation stages. Dental Press J Orthod. 2016; 21(3):73-84. PMC: 4944732. DOI: 10.1590/2177-6709.21.3.073-084.oar. View

Lee K, Park J, Tai K, Chae J . Treatment with Twin-block appliance followed by fixed appliance therapy in a growing Class II patient. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2016; 150(5):847-863. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2015.10.033. View

Mills C, McCulloch K . Posttreatment changes after successful correction of Class II malocclusions with the twin block appliance. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2000; 118(1):24-33. DOI: 10.1067/mod.2000.104902. View

Conroy-Piskai C, Galang-Boquiren M, Obrez A, Costa Viana M, Oppermann N, Sanchez F . Assessment of vertical changes during maxillary expansion using quad helix or bonded rapid maxillary expander. Angle Orthod. 2016; 86(6):925-933. PMC: 8597322. DOI: 10.2319/112315-799. View

McNamara Jr J . Early intervention in the transverse dimension: is it worth the effort?. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2002; 121(6):572-4. DOI: 10.1067/mod.2002.124167. View

Volk T, Sadowsky C, BeGole E, Boice P . Rapid palatal expansion for spontaneous Class II correction. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2010; 137(3):310-5. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2008.05.017. View

McNamara Jr J . Long-term adaptations to changes in the transverse dimension in children and adolescents: an overview. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2006; 129(4 Suppl):S71-4. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2005.09.020. View

10.

McNamara Jr J . Components of class II malocclusion in children 8-10 years of age. Angle Orthod. 1981; 51(3):177-202. DOI: 10.1043/0003-3219(1981)051<0177:COCIMI>2.0.CO;2. View

11.

Ehsani S, Nebbe B, Normando D, Lagravere M, Flores-Mir C . Short-term treatment effects produced by the Twin-block appliance: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Orthod. 2014; 37(2):170-6. DOI: 10.1093/ejo/cju030. View

12.

Lineberger M, McNamara J, Baccetti T, Herberger T, Franchi L . Effects of rapid maxillary expansion in hyperdivergent patients. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2012; 142(1):60-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2012.02.019. View

13.

Guest S, McNamara Jr J, Baccetti T, Franchi L . Improving Class II malocclusion as a side-effect of rapid maxillary expansion: a prospective clinical study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2010; 138(5):582-91. DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2008.12.026. View

14.

Lima Filho R, Carlos de Oliveira Ruellas A . Mandibular behavior with slow and rapid maxillary expansion in skeletal Class II patients: a long-term study. Angle Orthod. 2007; 77(4):625-31. DOI: 10.2319/071406-294. View

15.

Baratieri C, Alves Jr M, Franzotti SantAnna E, da Cunha Goncalves Nojima M, Issamu Nojima L . 3D mandibular positioning after rapid maxillary expansion in Class II malocclusion. Braz Dent J. 2011; 22(5):428-34. DOI: 10.1590/s0103-64402011000500014. View

16.

Farronato G, Giannini L, Galbiati G, Maspero C . Sagittal and vertical effects of rapid maxillary expansion in Class I, II, and III occlusions. Angle Orthod. 2011; 81(2):298-303. PMC: 8925266. DOI: 10.2319/050410-241.1. View

17.

Vargervik K . Morphologic evidence of muscle influence on dental arch width. Am J Orthod. 1979; 76(1):21-8. DOI: 10.1016/0002-9416(79)90296-3. View

18.

Abdullah R, Kuijpers M, Berge S, Katsaros C . Steiner cephalometric analysis: predicted and actual treatment outcome compared. Orthod Craniofac Res. 2006; 9(2):77-83. DOI: 10.1111/j.1601-6343.2006.00363.x. View

19.

Yildirim E, Karacay S, Erkan M . Condylar response to functional therapy with Twin-Block as shown by cone-beam computed tomography. Angle Orthod. 2014; 84(6):1018-25. PMC: 8638489. DOI: 10.2319/112713-869.1. View

20.

TOLLARO I, Baccetti T, Franchi L, Tanasescu C . Role of posterior transverse interarch discrepancy in Class II, Division 1 malocclusion during the mixed dentition phase. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1996; 110(4):417-22. DOI: 10.1016/s0889-5406(96)70045-8. View