Treatment of a skeletal Class II malocclusion using fixed functional appliance with miniplate anchorage

ABSTRACT

Based on our literature search, we found that the use of miniplate anchorage with Forsus fatigue-resistance device (FRD) has not yet been reported. Therefore, the aim of the present case report was to present the treatment of a patient with skeletal Class II malocclusion with mandibular retrusion using Forsus FRD with miniplate anchorage. Fixed appliances with 0.022-inch slots were attached to the maxillary teeth and after 8 months of the leveling and alignment of the upper arch, 0.019 × 0.025-inch stainless steel archwire was inserted and cinched back. Two weeks after the placement of the miniplates bilaterally at the symphysis of the mandible, Forsus FRD was adjusted to the miniplates with a 35-mm length of rod chosen. Nine months after the skeletal anchored Forsus worn, Class I canine and molar relations were achieved and overjet was eliminated.

Key words:

Fixed functional appliance - Forsus - miniplate - skeletal anchorage

• REFERENCES

• 1 Schmuth GP. Milestones in the development and practical application of functional appliances. Am J Orthod 1983; 84: 48-53
• 2 O'Brien K, Wright J, Conboy F, Sanjie Y, Mandall N, Chadwick S. et al. Effectiveness of treatment for Class II malocclusion with the Herbst or twin-block appliances: A randomized, controlled trial. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2003; 124: 128-37
• 3 Gunay EA, Arun T, Nalbantgil D. Evaluation of the immediate dentofacial changes in late adolescent patients treated with the forsus^(TM) FRD. Eur J Dent 2011; 5: 423-32
• 4 Bock NC, Reiser B, Ruf S. Class II subdivision treatment with the Herbst appliance. Angle Orthod 2013; 83: 327-33
• 5 Lima KJ, Henriques JF, Janson G, Pereira SC, Neves LS, Cançado RH. Dentoskeletal changes induced by the Jasper jumper and the activator-headgear combination appliances followed by fixed orthodontic treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2013; 143: 684-94
• 6 Chhibber A, Upadhyay M, Uribe F, Nanda R. Mechanism of Class II correction in prepubertal and postpubertal patients with twin force bite corrector. Angle Orthod 2013; 83: 718-27
• 7 Franchi L, Alvetro L, Giuntini V, Masucci C, Defraia E, Baccetti T. Effectiveness of comprehensive fixed appliance treatment used with the forsus fatigue resistant device in Class II patients. Angle Orthod 2011; 81: 678-83
• 8 Aras A, Ada E, Saracoğlu H, Gezer NS, Aras I. 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: 616-25
• 9 Aslan BI, Kucukkaraca E, Turkoz C, Dincer M. Treatment effects of the forsus fatigue resistant device used with miniscrew anchorage. Angle Orthod 2014; 84: 76-87
• 10 Jones G, Buschang PH, Kim KB, Oliver DR. Class II non-extraction patients treated with the forsus fatigue resistant device versus intermaxillary elastics. Angle Orthod 2008; 78: 332-8
• 11 Karacay S, Akin E, Olmez H, Gurton AU, Sagdic D. Forsus nitinol flat spring and Jasper jumper corrections of Class II division 1 malocclusions. Angle Orthod 2006; 76: 666-72
• 12 Oztoprak MO, Nalbantgil D, Uyanlar A, Arun T. A cephalometric comparative study of class II correction with Sabbagh Universal Spring (SUS (2)) and forsus FRD appliances. Eur J Dent 2012; 6: 302-10
• 13 Manni A, Pasini M, Mauro C. Comparison between herbst appliances with or without miniscrew anchorage. Dent Res J (Isfahan) 2012; 9 (Suppl. 02) S216-21