Festsitzende Behandlungsapparaturen zur Therapie der Distalbisslage – Eine Literaturübersicht

Zusammenfassung

Studienziel:

Ermittlung und Klassifikation kommerziell erhältlicher Apparaturen zur festsitzenden Behandlung der Distalbisslage.

Material und Methoden:

Über die Informationsquellen Internet, Messen/Kongresse, Fachbücher sowie Produktinformationen der Hersteller wurden festsitzende Apparaturen zur Unterkiefer-Vorverlagerung ermittelt. Ausgeschlossen wurden kommerziell nicht verfügbare Apparaturen. Über eine abschließende PubMed-Recherche wurde die Datenlage für die einzelnen Apparaturen überprüft. Die gefundenen Apparaturen wurden gemäß einer von den Autoren vorgeschlagenen 5-Punkte-Charakterisierung näher spezifiziert.

Ergebnisse:

Insgesamt konnten 35 Apparaturen zur Behandlung der Unterkiefer-Rücklage ermittelt werden, zu denen es eine stark differierende Anzahl wissenschaftlicher Studien gibt. Dabei handelte es sich um 14 starre, 15 elastische und 6 hybride Varianten. In der Gruppe der elastischen Behelfe, finden sich 5 Behandlungsmittel, die einen Ersatz von Klasse-II-Elastics darstellen und den Unterkiefer ziehend vorverlagern. Es handelt sich dabei um Federn, die an der Multibandapparatur einligiert werden, und so ihre Wirkung kooperationsunabhängig entfalten können. Mit Ausnahme der zuletzt genannten 5 Behandlungsmittel verlagern alle übrigen ermittelten Apparaturen den Unterkiefer schiebend.

Schlussfolgerung:

Aufgrund der sehr vielfältigen technischen Besonderheiten ist eine einfache, universelle Einteilung nicht möglich. Die von den Autoren vorgeschlagene 5-Punkte-Charkterisierung erwies sich zur Orientierung für die Praxis als hilfreich und kann die grundlegenden Konzepte gut darstellen. Die Datenlage hinsichtlich der einzelnen Apparaturen differiert stark.

Abstract

Aim:

Collection and classification of commercially available fixed appliances for treatment of retroposition of the mandible.

Material and Methods:

Internet search on manufacturers’ websites as well as reading orthodontic literature fixed appliances for mandibular advancement therapy were collected. Only commercially available appliances were included. The appliances were arranged according to a 5-Point-Classification. Literature on the appliances was found via an additional PubMed-Search.

Results:

35 appliances for Class II treatment were found. 14 were rigid, 15 elastic and 6 were hybrid intermaxillary appliances for mandibular advancement therapy. 5 of the elastic intermaxillary appliances substitute Class-II-Elastics (springs ligated to the multibracket-appliance, no patient compliance required), advancing the mandible in a pulling manner. With the exception of the last 5 appliances mentioned, all other appliances advance the mandible in a pushing manner.

Conclusion:

Because of the diversity of the technical features, a simple universal classification is not possible. The 5-point classification has proven to be a helpful tool for daily practice. It is able to document underlying basic concepts of the appliances. The quantity of literature found for the single appliances significantly differed.

Schlüsselwörter

Herbst Apparatur - Jasper Jumper - Angle Klasse II - Unterkiefervorverlagerung

Key words

herbst appliance - jasper jumper - angle class II - mandibular advancement

• Literatur

• 1 Papadopoulos MA. Orthodontic Treatment of the Class II Noncompliant Patient: Current Principles and Techniques. Edinburgh-London-New York-Oxford-Philadelphia-St. Louis-Sydney-Toronto: Mosby Elsevier; 2006
• 2 McSherry PF, Bradley H. Class II correction-reducing patient compliance: a review of the available techniques. J Orthod 2000; 27 (03) 219-225
• 3 Geiss E. Emil Herbst. Sein Leben, Werk und Einfluss auf die heutige Kieferorthopädie. Giessen: 1992
• 4 Pancherz H. History, background, and development of the Herbst appliance. Seminars in orthodontics 2003; 9 (01) 3-11
• 5 Pancherz H. Treatment of class II malocclusions by jumping the bite with the Herbst appliance. A cephalometric investigation. Am J Orthod 1979; 76 (04) 423-442
• 6 Hourfar J, Ludwig B, Ruf S. Das Behandlungsspektrum der Herbst-Apparatur im Verlauf von drei Jahrzehnten – Eine Literaturübersicht. Inf Orthod Kieferorthop 44 (03) 173-182
• 7 Pancherz H, Ruf S. Herbst-Apparatur. in Praxis der Zahnheilkunde. Diedrich P. (ed.). 2000. Urban und Fischer Verlag; 281-297
• 8 Pancherz H, Ruf S. The Herbst Appliance: Research-Based Clinical Mangement. Chicago: Quintessence; 2008
• 9 Jasper JJ, McNamara Jr JA. The correction of interarch malocclusions using a fixed force module. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1995; 108 (06) 641-650
• 10 Schrodt C, Pancherz H, Ruf S. Scientific evidence for the variety in bite jumping appliances. Eur J Orthod 2006; 28: e259
• 11 Pancherz H. The Herbst appliance – its biologic effects and clinical use. Am J Orthod 1985; 87 (01) 1-20
• 12 Vu J, Pancherz H, Schwestka-Polly R et al. Correction of Class II, Division 2 malocclusions using a completely customized lingual appliance and the Herbst device. J Orofac Orthop 2012; 73 (03) 225-235
• 13 Schiavoni R. The Herbst appliance updated. Prog Orthod 2011; 12 (02) 149-160
• 14 Sang T, Wu J, Huang Z et al. Treatment of Class II division 2 malocclusion with herbst appliance in young adults. Hua Xi Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi 2012; 30 (01) 49-53
• 15 Pellan P. The ‘new’ adventures of the ‘old’ Herbst*. Int J Orthod Milwaukee 2011; 22 (03) 43-48
• 16 Meyer-Marcotty P, Kochel J, Richter U et al. Reaction of facial soft tissues to treatment with a Herbst appliance. J Orofac Orthop 2012; 73 (02) 116-125
• 17 Bock NC, Ruf S. Dentoskeletal changes in adult Class II division 1 Herbst treatment – how much is left after the retention period?. Eur J Orthod 2011; 22: 22
• 18 El-Fateh T, Ruf S. Herbst treatment with mandibular cast splints – revisited. Angle Orthod 2011; 81 (05) 820-827
• 19 Filho LC, de Castro RC, An TL et al. New perspective on Herbst therapy for skeletal Class II malocclusions: A proposal for maxillary protrusion management. Orthodontics 2012; 13 (01) e188-e207
• 20 Kinzinger GS, Savvaidis S, Gross U et al. Effects of Class II treatment with a banded Herbst appliance on root lengths in the posterior dentition. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2011; 139 (04) 465-469
• 21 Moro A, Janson G, de Freitas MR et al. Class II correction with the Cantilever Bite Jumper. Angle Orthod 2009; 79 (02) 221-229
• 22 Kinzinger G, Ostheimer J, Forster F et al. Development of a new fixed functional appliance for treatment of skeletal class II malocclusion first report. J Orofac Orthop 2002; 63 (05) 384-399
• 23 Kinzinger GS, Diedrich PR. Bite jumping with the Functional Mandibular Advancer. J Clin Orthod 2005; 39 (12) 696-700
• 24 Kinzinger G, Gulden N Roth et al. Disc-condyle Relationships during Class II Treatment with the Functional Mandibular Advancer (FMA). J Orofac Orthop 2006; 67 (05) 356-375
• 25 Kinzinger G, Diedrich P. Skeletal effects in class II treatment with the functional mandibular advancer (FMA)?. J Orofac Orthop 2005; 66 (06) 469-490
• 26 Kinzinger G, Czaka K, Ludwig B et al. Effects of fixed appliances in correcting Angle Class II on the depth of the posterior airway space: FMA vs. Herbst appliance – a retrospective cephalometric study. J Orofac Orthop 2011; 72 (04) 301-320
• 27 Siara-Olds NJ, Pangrazio-Kulbersh V, Berger J et al. Long-term dentoskeletal changes with the Bionator, Herbst, Twin Block, and MARA functional appliances. Angle Orthod 2010; 80 (01) 18-29
• 28 Gonner U, Ozkan V, Jahn E et al. Effect of the MARA appliance on the position of the lower anteriors in children, adolescents and adults with Class II malocclusion. J Orofac Orthop 2007; 68 (05) 397-412
• 29 Rondeau B. MARA appliance. Funct Orthod 2002; 19 (02) 4-12
• 30 Eckhart JE. Sequential MARA-Invisalign treatment. J Clin Orthod 2009; 43 (07) 439-448
• 31 Pangrazio-Kulbersh V, Berger JL, Chemrmak DS et al. Treatment effects of the mandibular anterior repositioning appliance on patients with Class II malocclusion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2003; 123 (03) 286-295
• 32 Huanca Ghislanzoni LT, Baccetti T, Toll D et al. Treatment timing of MARA and fixed appliance therapy of Class II malocclusion. Eur J Orthod 2012; 15: 15
• 33 Al-Jewair TS, Preston CB, Moll EM et al. A comparison of the MARA and the AdvanSync functional appliances in the treatment of Class II malocclusion. Angle Orthod 2012; 3: 3
• 34 Pangrazio MN, Pangrazio-Kulbersh V, Berger JL et al. Treatment effects of the mandibular anterior repositioning appliance in patients with Class II skeletal malocclusions. Angle Orthod. 2012; 21: 21
• 35 Miller RA. The flip-lock Herbst appliance. J Clin Orthod 1996; 30 (10) 552-558
• 36 de Oliveira Jr JN, Rodrigues de Almeida R, Rodrigues de Almeida M et al. Dentoskeletal changes induced by the Jasper jumper and cervical headgear appliances followed by fixed orthodontic treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2007; 132 (01) 54-62
• 37 Karacay S, Akin E Olmez et al. Forsus Nitinol Flat Spring and Jasper Jumper corrections of Class II division 1 malocclusions. Angle Orthod 2006; 76 (04) 666-672
• 38 Nalbantgil D, Arun T, Sayinus K et al. Skeletal, dental and soft-tissue changes induced by the Jasper Jumper appliance in late adolescence. Angle Orthod 2005; 75 (03) 426-436
• 39 Sari Z, Goyenc Y, Doruk C et al. Comparative evaluation of a new removable Jasper Jumper functional appliance vs an activator-headgear combination. Angle Orthod 2003; 73 (03) 286-293
• 40 Covell Jr DA, Trammell DW, Boero RP et al. A cephalometric study of class II Division 1 malocclusions treated with the Jasper Jumper appliance. Angle Orthod 1999; 69 (04) 311-320
• 41 Erdogan E. Asymmetric application of the Jasper Jumper in the correction of midline discrepancies. J Clin Orthod 1998; 32 (03) 170-180
• 42 Pham T, Goz G, Bacher M et al. New clinical applications for the Jasper Jumper. J Orofac Orthop 1996; 57 (06) 366-371
• 43 Champagne M. The Jasper Jumper technique. Funct Orthod 1992; 9 (02) 19-21
• 44 Cash RG. Adult nonextraction treatment with a Jasper Jumper. J Clin Orthod 1991; 25 (01) 43-47
• 45 Stucki N, Ingervall B. The use of the Jasper Jumper for the correction of Class II malocclusion in the young permanent dentition. Eur J Orthod 1998; 20 (03) 271-281
• 46 Mills CM, McCulloch KJ. Case report: modified use of the Jasper Jumper appliance in a skeletal Class II mixed dentition case requiring palatal expansion. Angle Orthod 1997; 67 (04) 277-282
• 47 Cope JB, Buschang PH, Cope DD et al. Quantitative evaluation of craniofacial changes with Jasper Jumper therapy. Angle Orthod 1994; 64 (02) 113-122
• 48 Kucukkeles N, Ilhan I, Orgun IA. Treatment efficiency in skeletal Class II patients treated with the jasper jumper. Angle Orthod 2007; 77 (03) 449-456
• 49 Weiland FJ, Bantleon HP. Treatment of Class II malocclusions with the Jasper Jumper appliance – a preliminary report. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1995; 108 (04) 341-350
• 50 Weiland FJ, Droschl H. Treatment of a Class II, Division 1 malocclusion with the Jasper Jumper: a case report. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1996; 109 (01) 1-7
• 51 Weiland FJ, Ingervall B, Bantleon HP et al. Initial effects of treatment of Class II malocclusion with the Herren activator, activator-headgear combination, and Jasper Jumper. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1997; 112 (01) 19-27
• 52 Klapper L. The SUPERspring II: a new appliance for non-compliant Class II patients. J Clin Orthod 1999; 33 (01) 50-54
• 53 West RP. The adjustable bite corrector. J Clin Orthod 1995; 29 (10) 650-657
• 54 DeVincenzo J. The Eureka Spring: a new interarch force delivery system. J Clin Orthod 1997; 31 (07) 454-467
• 55 Stromeyer EL, Caruso JM, DeVincenzo JP. A cephalometric study of the Class II correction effects of the Eureka Spring. Angle Orthod 2002; 72 (03) 203-210
• 56 Vogt W. The Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device. J Clin Orthod 2006; 40 (06) 368-377
• 57 Heinig N, Goz G. Clinical application and effects of the Forsus spring. A study of a new Herbst hybrid. J Orofac Orthop 2001; 62 (06) 436-450
• 58 Chai ZW, Li LH, Song JL et al. Three-dimensional finite element analysis of stress distribution in mandible advanced with Forsus. Zhonghua Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi 2009; 44 (05) 293-296
• 59 Jones G, Buschang PH, Kim KB et al. Class II non-extraction patients treated with the Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device versus intermaxillary elastics. Angle Orthod 2008; 78 (02) 332-338
• 60 Liu YP, Zhou H, Zou M et al. Treatment of mandibular retrusion patients with Forsus appliance following growth spurts. Shanghai Kou Qiang Yi Xue 2007; 16 (04) 391-394
• 61 Ross AP, Gaffey BJ, Quick AN. Breakages using a unilateral fixed functional appliance: a case report using The Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device. J Orthod 2007; 34 (01) 2-5
• 62 Aras A, Ada E, Saracoglu H et al. Comparison of treatments with the Forsus fatigue resistant device in relation to skeletal maturity: a cephalometric and magnetic resonance imaging study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2011; 140 (05) 616-625
• 63 Gunay EA, Arun T, Nalbantgil D. Evaluation of the Immediate Dentofacial Changes in Late Adolescent Patients Treated with the Forsus FRD. Eur J Dent 2011; 5 (04) 423-432
• 64 Franchi L, Alvetro L, Giuntini V et al. Effectiveness of comprehensive fixed appliance treatment used with the Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device in Class II patients. Angle Orthod 2011; 81 (04) 678-683
• 65 Karunakara BC, Shwetha GS. Precise insertion of the Forsus fatigue resistant device. J Clin Orthod 2010; 44 (09) 552
• 66 Li LH, Song JL, Gao X et al. Biomechanical study of „mandible-temporomandibular joint“ under different loading angles with forsus. Sichuan Da Xue Xue Bao Yi Xue Ban 2011; 42 (06) 835-837
• 67 Rizwan M, Mascarenhas R, Husain A. Rotation wedges for forsus treatment. J Clin Orthod 2010; 44 (12) 748
• 68 Sood S. The Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device as a fixed functional appliance. J Clin Orthod 2011; 45 (08) 463-466
• 69 Sood S, Kharbanda OP, Duggal R et al. Muscle response during treatment of Class II Division 1 malocclusion with Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2011; 35 (03) 331-338
• 70 Ye J, Wang CL, Liu DX et al. Clinical effect of modified forsus appliance to children with mandibular retrusion. Hua Xi Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi 2006; 24 (03) 246-249
• 71 Vijayalakshmi PS, Veereshi AS. Management of severe Class II malocclusion with fixed functional appliance: Forsus. J Contemp Dent Pract 2011; 12 (03) 216-220
• 72 Altug-Atac AT, Dalci ON, Memikoglu UT. Skeletal Class II treatment with Twin Force Bite Corrector: case reports. World J Orthod 2008; 9 (03) e7-e17
• 73 Chhibber A, Upadhyay M, Uribe F et al. Long-term stability of Class II correction with the Twin Force Bite Corrector. J Clin Orthod 2010; 44 (06) 363-376
• 74 Davoody AR, Feldman J, Uribe FA et al. Mandibular molar protraction with the Twin Force Bite Corrector in a Class II patient. J Clin Orthod 2011; 45 (04) 223-228
• 75 Rothenberg J, Campbell ES, Nanda R. Class II correction with the Twin Force Bite Corrector. J Clin Orthod 2004; 38 (04) 232-240
• 76 Mahony D. Twin Force Bite Corrector – hyper efficient Class II correction for a busy orthodontic practice. Int J Orthod Milwaukee 2003; 14 (04) 9-14
• 77 Aziz T, Nassar U, Flores-Mir C. Prediction of lower incisor proclination during Xbow treatment based on initial cephalometric variables. Angle Orthod 2012; 82 (03) 472-479
• 78 Flores-Mir C, Barnett G, Higgins DW et al. Short-term skeletal and dental effects of the Xbow appliance as measured on lateral cephalograms. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2009; 136 (06) 822-832
• 79 Flores-Mir C, Young A, Greiss A et al. Lower incisor inclination changes during Xbow treatment according to vertical facial type. Angle Orthod 2010; 80 (06) 1075-1080
• 80 Pancherz H. The mechanism of Class II correction in Herbst appliance treatment. A cephalometric investigation. Am J Orthod 1982; 82 (02) 104-113
• 81 Martin J, Pancherz H. Mandibular incisor position changes in relation to amount of bite jumping during Herbst/multibracket appliance treatment: a radiographic-cephalometric study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2009; 136 (01) 44-51
• 82 Aelbers CM, Dermaut LR. Orthopedics in orthodontics: Part I, Fiction or reality – a review of the literature. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1996; 110 (05) 513-519
• 83 Aelbers C, Dermault L. Orthopedics in orthodontics. Fiction or reality? Rev Belge Med Dent 1994; 49: 26-40
• 84 Ruf S, Pancherz H. Temporomandibular joint remodeling in adolescents and young adults during Herbst treatment: A prospective longitudinal magnetic resonance imaging and cephalometric radiographic investigation. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1999; 115 (06) 607-618
• 85 Pancherz H, Fischer S. Amount and direction of temporomandibular joint growth changes in Herbst treatment: a cephalometric long-term investigation. Angle Orthod 2003; 73 (05) 493-501
• 86 Ruf S. Short- and Long-Term Effects of the Herbst Appliance on Temporomandibular Joint Function. Semin Orthod 2003; (09) 74-86
• 87 Ritto AK. Fixed functional appliances – trends for the next century. Funct Orthod 1999; 16 (02) 22-39
• 88 Ritto AK, Ferreira AP. Fixed functional appliances – a classification. Funct Orthod 2000; 17 (02) 12-30
• 89 Miethke RR. Therapie der Klasse II/1. In Praxis der Zahnheilkunde 11, Kieferorthopädie II. Diedrich P. (ed.) 2000. Urban und Fischer Verlag; München Jena: 299-313
• 90 Jost-Brinkmann PG, Miethke RR. Wirkungen und Nebenwirkungen intermaxillärer Gummizüge. Prakt Kieferorthop 1990; 4: 189
• 91 Nelson B, Hansen K, Hagg U. Class II correction in patients treated with class II elastics and with fixed functional appliances: a comparative study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2000; 118 (02) 142-149
• 92 Spalding P. Treatment of Class II Malocclusions. In: Textbook of Orthodontics. Bishara SE. (ed.). 2001. W. B. Saunders; 324-374
• 93 Stewart CM, Chaconas SJ, Caputo AA. Effects of intermaxillary elastic traction on orthodontic tooth movement. J Oral Rehabil 1978; 5 (02) 159-166
• 94 Hansen K. Treatment and posttreatment effects of the Herbst appliance on the dental arches and arch relationships. Seminars in orthodontics 2003; 9 (01) 67-73
• 95 Aziz T, Nassar U, Flores-Mir C. Prediction of lower incisor proclination during Xbow treatment based on initial cephalometric variables. The Angle Orthodontist 2011; 82 (03) 472-479
• 96 Dischinger T. Edgewise Herbst Appliance. J Clin Orthod 1995; 29 (12) 738-742
• 97 Blackwood 3rd HO. Clinical management of the Jasper Jumper. J Clin Orthod 1991; 25 (12) 755-760
• 98 Wigal TG, Dischinger T, Martin C et al. Stability of Class II treatment with an edgewise crowned Herbst appliance in the early mixed dentition: Skeletal and dental changes. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2011; 140 (02) 210-223
• 99 Ghislanzoni LT, Toll DE, Defraia E et al. Treatment and posttreatment outcomes induced by the Mandibular Advancement Repositioning Appliance; a controlled clinical study. Angle Orthod 2011; 81 (04) 684-691
• 100 Langford Jr NM. The Herbst appliance. J Clin Orthod 1981; 15 (08) 558-561
• 101 Kinzinger G, Frye L, Diedrich P. Class II treatment in adults: comparing camouflage orthodontics, dentofacial orthopedics and orthognathic surgery – a cephalometric study to evaluate various therapeutic effects. J Orofac Orthop 2009; 70 (01) 63-91
• 102 Baccetti T, Franchi L, McNamara JA Jr et al. Early dentofacial features of Class II malocclusion: a longitudinal study from the deciduous through the mixed dentition. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1997; 111 (05) 502-509
• 103 White LW. Current Herbst appliance therapy. J Clin Orthod 1994; 28 (05) 296-309
• 104 Corti AF. Prevention of Loose Herbst Appliance Screws. J Clin Orthod 1995; 29 (04) 236
• 105 Sanden E, Pancherz H, Hansen K. Complications during Herbst appliance treatment. J Clin Orthod 2004; 38 (03) 130-133
• 106 Farronato G, Santamaria G, Gressoni P et al. The Digital-Titanium Herbst. J Clin Orthod 2011; 45 (05) 263-267