Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Class II malocclusion treatment changes with the Jones jig, Distal jet and First Class appliances.
J Appl Oral Sci. 2020; 28:e20190364.JA

Abstract

Objective Maxillary molar distalization with intraoral distalizer appliances is a non-extraction orthodontic treatment used to correct molar relationship in patients with Class II malocclusion presenting maxillary dentoalveolar protrusion and minor skeletal discrepancies. This study compares the changes caused by three distalizers with different force systems. Methodology 71 patients, divided into three groups, were included. The Jones jig group (JJG, n=30; 16 male, 14 female, 13.17 years mean age) was treated with the Jones jig for 0.8 years. The Distal jet group (DJG, n=25; 8 male, 17 female, 12.57 years mean age) was treated with the Distal jet for 1.06 years. The First Class group (FCG, n=16; 6 male, 10 female, 12.84 years mean age) was treated with the First Class for 0.69 years. Intergroup treatment changes were compared using one-way ANOVA, followed by post-hoc Tukey's tests. Results Intergroup comparisons showed significantly greater maxillary incisor protrusion in DJG than in FCG (2.56±2.24 mm vs. 0.74±1.39mm, p=0.015). The maxillary first premolars showed progressive and significantly smaller mesial angulation in JJG, FCG and DJG, respectively (14.65±6.31º, 8.43±3.99º, 0.97±3.16º; p<0.001). They also showed greater mesialization in JJG than FCG (3.76±1.46 mm vs. 2.27±1.47 mm, p=0.010), and greater extrusion in DJG compared to JJG (0.90±0.77 mm vs 0.11±0.60 mm, p=0.004). The maxillary second premolars showed progressive and significantly smaller mesial angulation and mesialization in JJG, FCG and DJG, respectively (12.77±5.78º, 3.20±3.94º, -2.12±3.71º and 3.87±1.34 mm, 2.25±1.40 mm, 1.24±1.26 mm, respectively; p<0.001). DJG showed smaller distal angulation of maxillary first molars (-2.14±5.09º vs. -7.73±4.28º and -6.05±3.76º, for the JJG and FCG, respectively; p<0.001) and greater maxillary second molars extrusion (1.17±1.41 mm vs -0.02±1.16 mm and 0.16±1.40 mm, for the JJG and FCG, respectively; p=0.003). Overjet change was significantly larger in DJG compared to FCG (1.79±1.67 mm vs 0.68±0.84; p=0.046). Treatment time was smaller in FCG (0.69±0.22 years vs 0.81±0.33 years and 1.06±0.42 years, comparing it with the JJG and DJG, respectively; p=0.005). Conclusion The three appliances corrected the Class II molar relationship by dentoalveolar changes. The Distal jet produced smaller molar distal angulation than the Jones jig and First Class. The First Class appliance showed less anchorage loss, greater percentage of distalization and shorter treatment time than the Jones jig and Distal jet.

Authors+Show Affiliations

Departamento de Odontopediatria, Ortodontia e Saúde Coletiva, Faculdade de Odontologia de Bauru, Universidade de São Paulo, Bauru, São Paulo, Brasil.Departamento de Odontopediatria, Ortodontia e Saúde Coletiva, Faculdade de Odontologia de Bauru, Universidade de São Paulo, Bauru, São Paulo, Brasil.Departamento de Odontopediatria, Ortodontia e Saúde Coletiva, Faculdade de Odontologia de Bauru, Universidade de São Paulo, Bauru, São Paulo, Brasil.Departamento de Odontopediatria, Ortodontia e Saúde Coletiva, Faculdade de Odontologia de Bauru, Universidade de São Paulo, Bauru, São Paulo, Brasil.Departamento de Odontopediatria, Ortodontia e Saúde Coletiva, Faculdade de Odontologia de Bauru, Universidade de São Paulo, Bauru, São Paulo, Brasil.Departamento de Odontopediatria, Ortodontia e Saúde Coletiva, Faculdade de Odontologia de Bauru, Universidade de São Paulo, Bauru, São Paulo, Brasil.Departamento de Odontopediatria, Ortodontia e Saúde Coletiva, Faculdade de Odontologia de Bauru, Universidade de São Paulo, Bauru, São Paulo, Brasil.Departamento de Odontopediatria, Ortodontia e Saúde Coletiva, Faculdade de Odontologia de Bauru, Universidade de São Paulo, Bauru, São Paulo, Brasil.

Pub Type(s)

Comparative Study
Journal Article

Language

eng

PubMed ID

32348442

Citation

Vilanova, Lorena, et al. "Class II Malocclusion Treatment Changes With the Jones Jig, Distal Jet and First Class Appliances." Journal of Applied Oral Science : Revista FOB, vol. 28, 2020, pp. e20190364.
Vilanova L, Henriques JFC, Patel MP, et al. Class II malocclusion treatment changes with the Jones jig, Distal jet and First Class appliances. J Appl Oral Sci. 2020;28:e20190364.
Vilanova, L., Henriques, J. F. C., Patel, M. P., Reis, R. S., Grec, R. H. D. C., Aliaga-Del Castillo, A., Bellini-Pereira, S. A., & Janson, G. (2020). Class II malocclusion treatment changes with the Jones jig, Distal jet and First Class appliances. Journal of Applied Oral Science : Revista FOB, 28, e20190364. https://doi.org/10.1590/1678-7757-2019-0364
Vilanova L, et al. Class II Malocclusion Treatment Changes With the Jones Jig, Distal Jet and First Class Appliances. J Appl Oral Sci. 2020;28:e20190364. PubMed PMID: 32348442.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - Class II malocclusion treatment changes with the Jones jig, Distal jet and First Class appliances. AU - Vilanova,Lorena, AU - Henriques,José Fernando Castanha, AU - Patel,Mayara Paim, AU - Reis,Rachelle Simões, AU - Grec,Roberto Henrique da Costa, AU - Aliaga-Del Castillo,Aron, AU - Bellini-Pereira,Silvio Augusto, AU - Janson,Guilherme, Y1 - 2020/04/27/ PY - 2019/06/25/received PY - 2019/12/19/accepted PY - 2020/4/30/entrez PY - 2020/4/30/pubmed PY - 2020/5/20/medline SP - e20190364 EP - e20190364 JF - Journal of applied oral science : revista FOB JO - J Appl Oral Sci VL - 28 N2 - Objective Maxillary molar distalization with intraoral distalizer appliances is a non-extraction orthodontic treatment used to correct molar relationship in patients with Class II malocclusion presenting maxillary dentoalveolar protrusion and minor skeletal discrepancies. This study compares the changes caused by three distalizers with different force systems. Methodology 71 patients, divided into three groups, were included. The Jones jig group (JJG, n=30; 16 male, 14 female, 13.17 years mean age) was treated with the Jones jig for 0.8 years. The Distal jet group (DJG, n=25; 8 male, 17 female, 12.57 years mean age) was treated with the Distal jet for 1.06 years. The First Class group (FCG, n=16; 6 male, 10 female, 12.84 years mean age) was treated with the First Class for 0.69 years. Intergroup treatment changes were compared using one-way ANOVA, followed by post-hoc Tukey's tests. Results Intergroup comparisons showed significantly greater maxillary incisor protrusion in DJG than in FCG (2.56±2.24 mm vs. 0.74±1.39mm, p=0.015). The maxillary first premolars showed progressive and significantly smaller mesial angulation in JJG, FCG and DJG, respectively (14.65±6.31º, 8.43±3.99º, 0.97±3.16º; p<0.001). They also showed greater mesialization in JJG than FCG (3.76±1.46 mm vs. 2.27±1.47 mm, p=0.010), and greater extrusion in DJG compared to JJG (0.90±0.77 mm vs 0.11±0.60 mm, p=0.004). The maxillary second premolars showed progressive and significantly smaller mesial angulation and mesialization in JJG, FCG and DJG, respectively (12.77±5.78º, 3.20±3.94º, -2.12±3.71º and 3.87±1.34 mm, 2.25±1.40 mm, 1.24±1.26 mm, respectively; p<0.001). DJG showed smaller distal angulation of maxillary first molars (-2.14±5.09º vs. -7.73±4.28º and -6.05±3.76º, for the JJG and FCG, respectively; p<0.001) and greater maxillary second molars extrusion (1.17±1.41 mm vs -0.02±1.16 mm and 0.16±1.40 mm, for the JJG and FCG, respectively; p=0.003). Overjet change was significantly larger in DJG compared to FCG (1.79±1.67 mm vs 0.68±0.84; p=0.046). Treatment time was smaller in FCG (0.69±0.22 years vs 0.81±0.33 years and 1.06±0.42 years, comparing it with the JJG and DJG, respectively; p=0.005). Conclusion The three appliances corrected the Class II molar relationship by dentoalveolar changes. The Distal jet produced smaller molar distal angulation than the Jones jig and First Class. The First Class appliance showed less anchorage loss, greater percentage of distalization and shorter treatment time than the Jones jig and Distal jet. SN - 1678-7765 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/32348442/Class_II_malocclusion_treatment_changes_with_the_Jones_jig_Distal_jet_and_First_Class_appliances_ L2 - https://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&amp;pid=S1678-77572020000100434&amp;lng=en&amp;nrm=iso&amp;tlng=en DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -