Cephalometric facial soft tissue changes with the twin block appliance in Class II division 1 malocclusion patients. A systematic review.

Craniofacial and Oral Health Evidence-based Practice Group, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Alberta, Canada.
The Angle Orthodontist (Impact Factor: 1.28). 10/2006; 76(5):876-81. DOI: 10.1043/0003-3219(2006)076[0876:CFSTCW]2.0.CO;2
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To evaluate facial soft tissue changes after the use of the twin block appliance in Class II division 1 malocclusion patients.
Several electronic databases (PubMed, MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, Cochrane databases, EMBASE, Web of Science, and LILACS) were searched with the help of a senior health-sciences librarian. Abstracts that appeared to fulfill the initial selection criteria were selected by consensus, and the original articles were retrieved. The article references were hand-searched for possible missing articles. Clinical trials that assessed facial soft tissue changes with the use of the twin block appliance without any surgical intervention or syndromic characteristics were considered. A comparable untreated control group was required to factor out normal growth changes.
Two articles fulfilled the selection criteria and quantified facial soft tissue changes. Although some statistically significant changes in the soft tissue profile were found, the magnitude of the changes may not be perceived as clinically significant. Changes produced in the upper lip seem to be controversial, although the study with sounder methodological quality did not report significant changes. No change in the anteroposterior position of the lower lip and the soft tissue menton or improvement of the facial convexity was found.
Three-dimensional quantification of the soft tissue changes is required to overcome current limitations in our understanding of the soft tissue changes obtained after the use of the twin block appliance in Class II division 1 malocclusion patients.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The purpose of this literature review is to compare the effects of headgears and functional appliances in treating children with distoclusions. The comparisons are made as a series of key questions addressing short-term effects, outcomes following fixed appliance treatment, and post-retention effects. Headgears and functional appliances are equally effective in correcting Class II malocclusions in children (before comprehensive treatment). Short-term skeletal effects include a small restriction in forward maxillary growth with headgear and a small forward positioning of B point with functional appliances, leading to an ANB improvement in Class II patients of about 1° with either appliance. A significant portion of the Class II correction is distal maxillary molar movement with headgears and mesial mandibular molar movement (plus mandibular incisor proclination) with functional appliances. Higher levels of evidence, to answer the question of whether the effects of headgears and functional appliances are equal following fixed appliances, are lacking and needs to be addressed.
    Seminars in Orthodontics 09/2013; 19(3):174–195. DOI:10.1053/j.sodo.2013.03.007
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This Systematic Review (SR) aims to assess the quality of SRs and Meta-Analyses (MAs) on functional orthopaedic treatment of Class II malocclusion and to summarise and rate the reported effects. Electronic and manual searches were conducted until June 2014. SRs and MAs focusing on the effects of functional orthopaedic treatment of Class II malocclusion in growing patients were included. The methodological quality of the included papers was assessed using the AMSTAR (Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews). The design of the primary studies included in each SR was assessed with Level of Research Design scoring. The evidence of the main outcomes was summarised and rated according to a scale of statements. 14 SRs fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The appliances evaluated were as follows: Activator (2 studies), Twin Block (4 studies), headgear (3 studies), Herbst (2 studies), Jasper Jumper (1 study), Bionator (1 study) and Fränkel-2 (1 study). Four studies reviewed several functional appliances, as a group. The mean AMSTAR score was 6 (ranged 2-10). Six SRs included only controlled clinical trials (CCTs), three SRs included only randomised controlled trials (RCTs), four SRs included both CCTs and RCTs and one SR included also expert opinions. There was some evidence of reduction of the overjet, with different appliances except from headgear; there was some evidence of small maxillary growth restrain with Twin Block and headgear; there was some evidence of elongation of mandibular length, but the clinical relevance of this results is still questionable; there was insufficient evidence to determine an effect on soft tissues. © 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
    Journal of Oral Rehabilitation 03/2015; DOI:10.1111/joor.12295 · 1.93 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Summary OBJECTIVE: To evaluate dental, skeletal, and soft tissue effects during Twin-block treatment.
    The European Journal of Orthodontics 07/2014; DOI:10.1093/ejo/cju030 · 1.39 Impact Factor