A retrospective study evaluating the influence of Class III correction appliances on the sagittal pharyngeal airway dimension.

The aim of this study was to compare the effects of Class III correction appliances including the Facemask (FM), and the new non-compliance fixed functional appliances such as the Reversed Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device (FRD), as well as the CS-2000 (CS), on the sagittal pharyngeal airway dimension (SPAD). Pre-treatment and post-treatment lateral cephalograms of 45 patients who underwent Class III appliance treatment, using either FM, Reversed FRD, or CS were collected from the files of treated patients. SPAD changes were evaluated in each group, and comparisons were conducted between the three study groups. Additionally, sagittal and vertical skeletal measurements were conducted. The FM, the Reversed FRD, and the CS, were found to generate a significant increase in the SPAD, with the Reversed FRD contributing to the most significant change at the OPAA (116.80 ± 26.36 mm2). All three appliances elicited significant antero-posterior changes in the SNA°, SNB°, and ANB°, also with the greatest intermaxillary change documented with the employment of the Reversed FRD (ANB° = 3.33 ± 0.82°). As for the vertical dimension, the FM, the Reversed FRD, and the CS elicited significant FMA° increases, with the greatest change attributed to the FM (FMA° = 2.32 ± 0.97°). Therefore, the three tested Class III corrective appliances generated significant SPAD, antero-posterior, and vertical changes. However, the Revered FRD showed a superior impact in increasing the SPAD at the OPAA level and in eliciting significant intermaxillary changes.

Cephalometric changes in pharyngeal airway dimensions after functional treatment with twin block versus myobrace appliances in developing skeletal class II patients: a randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Several appliances have been used for correction of developing skeletal Class II, including different myofunctional appliances as Twin block (TB)as well as the new pre-fabricated Myobrace (MB) appliance. However, the effects of these devices on the pharyngeal airways have not been compared in the literature. Thus, the aim of this study was to compare the effects of two Class II correction appliances; TB and MB on the sagittal pharyngeal airway dimension (SPAD), including the nasopharyngeal airway area (NPAA), the oropharyngeal airway area (OPAA), and the laryngopharyngeal airway area (LPAA). METHODS: This is a two parallel arms randomized comparative clinical trial. Twenty-six children of 9-12 years with Skeletal Class II malocclusion due to mandibular deficiency and normal maxillary growth as confirmed by lateral cephalometric X-ray readings (ANB angle > 4° and SNB angle < 78) and Cervical vertebral maturational index (CVMI) 1 or 2 were randomly assigned into two equal groups. Group I: TB, Group II: MB (prefabricated functional appliance, Myofunctional Research Co., Australia). Lateral cephalograms were taken for all patients in both groups before treatment (T1) and after treatment (6 months later) (T2). The primary aim was to assess pre and post treatment changes in the SPAD in each group, and compare between the two study groups. The secondary aim was to evaluate the sagittal skeletal measurements such as the SNA, SNB, ANB, Wits appraisal, as well as vertical skeletal measurements represented by the Frankfurt-mandibular plane angle (FMA) measured pre- and post-treatment. The independent samples t-test was used to compare the two study groups, and the mean difference and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were computed. The paired samples t-test was used to compare various parameters between T1 and T2 within each group. The cutoff for significance was p-value < 0.05. Data were analyzed using IBM SPSS for Windows (Version 26.0). RESULTS: By Comparing changes in airway measurements within each group, it was found that NPAA, OPAA, and LPAA increased significantly after treatment within each group of MB and TB. TB group showed significantly higher mean difference (T2-T1) in both NPAA and OPAA than MB group with 28.39 (± 56.75) and 40.46 (± 52.16) respectively. The increase in LPAA values was not statistically significant at (T2-T1) between both groups. Regarding skeletal changes, there was a significant increase in the SNB values between T1 and T2 within each group with 2.82 (± 3.32) for MB group and 3.79 (± 3.06) for TB group Moreover, there was a significant decrease in the ANB values between T1 and T2 within each group by 2.42 (± 2.70) for MB group and 3.06 (± 1.14) for TB group. Similarly, there was a significant decrease in the ANB values between T1 and T2 within each group by -2.13 (± 0.62) for MB group and - 2.46 (± 0.72) for TB group. No significant differences were found between both groups in SNA, SNB, ANB and Wits appraisal at p = 0.06, p = 0.45, p = 0.43 and p = 0.22 respectively. FMA did not show significant difference between T1 and T2 within each group, nor showed a significant mean difference between both groups at T2-T1. CONCLUSIONS: TB was more effective than MB in improving the upper (NPAA) and middle (OPAA) airways, while no difference was found regarding the lower airway (LPAA). Both TB and MB reduced the severity of developing skeletal class II due to mandibular retrognathism by forward posturing of the mandible. Thus, patients with airway problems would benefit more from TB than MB.

Does maxillary sinus proximity affect molar root resorption during distalization using Invisalign? a CBCT study.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to assess the correlation between maxillary sinus proximity to root apices of maxillary molars and root resorption during molar distalization using clear aligner therapy (CAT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty-eight cone beam computed tomography scans (CBCTs) obtained pre- (T0) and post-treatment (T1) from 19 adult patients (36.68 ± 13.50 years), who underwent maxillary molar distalization using Invisalign® aligners (Align Technology, Inc., San José, CA, USA) with a minimum of 2 mm distalization, were evaluated in this study At least 22 h of aligner wear per day was a main inclusion criterion. Sinus proximity and changes in root lengths were measured for 61 molars (183 roots). Spearman coefficient analysis was used for assessing correlation between sinus proximity and root resorption. The level of significance was set at p ≤ 0.05. The reproducibility of measurements was assessed by intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). RESULTS: Spearman coefficient revealed no significant correlation between sinus proximity and molar root resorption for mesiobuccal, distobuccal or palatal roots (p = 0.558, p = 0.334, p = 0.931, respectively). CONCLUSION: There was no correlation between maxillary sinus proximity to root apices of maxillary molars and root resorption.