Three‐dimensional comparison of the skeletal and dentoalveolar effects of the Herbst and Pendulum appliances followed by fixed appliances: A CBCT study. (10th October 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Taylor, Kyle L.; Evangelista, Karine; Muniz, Luciana; Ruellas, Antônio Carlos de Oliveira; Valladares‐Neto, José; McNamara, James; Franchi, Lorenzo; Kim‐Berman, Hera; Cevidanes, Lucia Helena Soares
• Is Part Of: Orthodontics and craniofacial research. Volume 23:Number 1(2020)
• Page Start: 72
• Page End: 81
• Publication Date: 2019-10-10
• Subjects: Angle Class II malocclusion -- cone‐beam computed tomography -- Herbst appliance -- Pendulum appliance -- three‐dimensional images; Skull -- Growth -- Periodicals; Facial bones -- Growth -- Periodicals; Orthodontics -- Periodicals; Orthodontics, Corrective -- Periodicals; Orthodontic appliances -- Periodicals; 617.51
• DOI: 10.1111/ocr.12345
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1601-6335

Abstract

Abstract: Objectives: To compare three‐dimensional (3D) skeletal and dentoalveolar effects of the Herbst and Pendulum appliances followed by fixed orthodontic treatment in growing patients. Setting and sample population: A sample of 35 adolescents with cone‐beam computed tomography scans obtained prior to Herbst and Pendulum treatment (T1) and immediately after fixed appliance treatment (T2). Materials and Methods: Patients with Class II malocclusion was assessed retrospectively and divided into two treatment groups: Herbst group (n = 17, age: 12.0 ± 1.6 years) and Pendulum group (n = 18, age: 12.1 ± 1.5 years), with a mean treatment duration of 2.8 ± 0.8 years and 2.5 ± 0.7 years, respectively. Reconstructions of the maxillomandibular and dentoalveolar regions and data in 3D were obtained relative to cranial base, maxillary and mandibular regional superimpositions. Treatment outcomes (T2‐T1) were compared between both groups using t tests for independent samples ( P <.05). Results: Significant increase in mandibular length was observed in the Herbst group (7.3 ± 3.5 mm) relative to the Pendulum group (4.6 ± 4.5 mm). Inferior and anterior displacements of Pogonion were 2.2 mm and 1.6 mm greater in the Herbst group, respectively. The mesial displacement of the lower first molars was significantly greater in the Herbst group (1.9 mm). The upper first molars had contrasting results in sagittal displacement, with 0.6 ± 1.7 mm of distal displacement with the Pendulum and 1.4 ± 2.1 mm of mesial displacement with the Herbst. Lower incisor projection and proclination were similar between groups. Conclusions: The Herbst and Pendulum appliances followed by comprehensive orthodontic treatment effectively corrected Class II malocclusion in growing patients, but with differing skeletal and dentoalveolar effects.