Twenty-year clinical experience with fixed functional appliances

ABSTRACT Introduction: Considering the large number of fixed functional appliances, choosing the best device for your patient is not an easy task. Objective: To describe the development of fixed functional appliances as well as our 20-year experience working with them. Methods: Fixed functional appliances are grouped into flexible, rigid and hybrid. They are different appliances, whose action is described here. Four clinical cases will be reported with a view to illustrating the different appliances. Conclusions: Rigid fixed functional appliances provide better skeletal results than flexible and hybrid ones. Flexible and hybrid appliances have similar effects to those produced by Class II elastics. They ultimately correct Class II with dentoalveolar changes. From a biomechanical standpoint, fixed functional appliances are more recommended to treat Class II in dolichofacial patients, in comparison to Class II elastics.

[1]  J. McNamara,et al.  Three-dimensional skeletal mandibular changes associated with Herbst appliance treatment. , 2017, Orthodontics & craniofacial research.

[2]  V. Koretsi,et al.  Treatment effects of fixed functional appliances in patients with Class II malocclusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis. , 2016, European journal of orthodontics.

[3]  U. Hägg,et al.  Class II correction in patients treated with class II elastics and with fixed functional appliances: a comparative study. , 2000, American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics.

[4]  J. McNamara,et al.  An evaluation of two-phase treatment with the Herbst appliance and preadjusted edgewise therapy. , 1998, Seminars in orthodontics.

[5]  N. Ye,et al.  The effectiveness of the Herbst appliance for patients with Class II malocclusion: a meta-analysis. , 2016, European journal of orthodontics.

[6]  A. Fuziy,et al.  Descrição passo-a-passo do aparelho de Herbst com coroas de aço superiores e "Splint" removível inferior , 2001 .

[7]  P. Buschang,et al.  Mandibular rotation revisited: What makes it so important? , 2014 .

[8]  J. McNamara,et al.  Long-term effectiveness and treatment timing for Bionator therapy. , 2009, The Angle orthodontist.

[9]  Camilla Fiedler Fonçatti,et al.  Long‐term stability of Class II treatment with the Jasper jumper appliance , 2017, American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics.

[10]  R. P. Howe.  The bonded Herbst appliance. , 1982, Journal of clinical orthodontics : JCO.

[11]  G. Correr,et al.  Retrospective study of clinical complications during orthodontic treatment with either a removable mandibular acrylic splint Herbst or with a cantilever Herbst. , 2015, The Angle orthodontist.

[12]  H. Pancherz,et al.  Complications during Herbst appliance treatment. , 2004, Journal of clinical orthodontics.

[13]  P. Buschang,et al.  Treatment changes of hypo- and hyperdivergent Class II Herbst patients. , 2018, The Angle orthodontist.

[14]  W J Houston,et al.  The analysis of errors in orthodontic measurements. , 1983, American journal of orthodontics.

[15]  C. Cm.  Mandibular protraction appliances for Class II treatment. , 1995 .

[16]  H. Pancherz,et al.  Dentofacial orthopaedics in relation to chronological age, growth period and skeletal development. An analysis of 72 male patients with Class II division 1 malocclusion treated with the Herbst appliance. , 1988, European journal of orthodontics.

[17]  H. Pancherz.  Treatment of class II malocclusions by jumping the bite with the Herbst appliance. A cephalometric investigation. , 1979, American journal of orthodontics.

[18]  K. O’Brien,et al.  Incremental versus maximum bite advancement during twin-block therapy: a randomized controlled clinical trial. , 2004, American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics.

[19]  H. Saltaji,et al.  Patient experiences with the Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device. , 2013, The Angle orthodontist.

[20]  E. Gunel,et al.  Cephalometric study of Class II Division 1 patients treated with an extended-duration, reinforced, banded Herbst appliance followed by fixed appliances. , 2016, American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics.

[21]  C. M. Coêlho Filho.  Mandibular protraction appliances for Class II treatment. , 1995, Journal of clinical orthodontics : JCO.

[22]  L. Johnston.  Functional appliances: a mortgage on mandibular position. , 1996, Australian orthodontic journal.

[23]  I. Aras,et al.  Comparison of stepwise vs single-step advancement with the Functional Mandibular Advancer in Class II division 1 treatment. , 2017, The Angle orthodontist.

[24]  G. Kinzinger,et al.  Class II Treatment in Adults: Comparing Camouflage Orthodontics, Dentofacial Orthopedics and Orthognathic Surgery – A Cephalometric Study to Evaluate Various Therapeutic Effects* , 2009, Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics / Fortschritte der Kieferorthopädie.

[25]  H. Pancherz,et al.  Efficiency of three mandibular anchorage forms in Herbst treatment: a cephalometric investigation. , 2009, The Angle orthodontist.

[26]  Lorenzo Franchi,et al.  Mandibular changes produced by functional appliances in Class II malocclusion: a systematic review. , 2006, American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics.

[27]  P. Sinclair,et al.  Treatment effects of the Herbst appliance. , 1989, American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics.

[28]  G. Janson,et al.  Class II correction with the Cantilever Bite Jumper. , 2009, The Angle orthodontist.

[29]  Hongtu Zhu,et al.  Three-dimensional treatment outcomes in Class II patients treated with the Herbst appliance: a pilot study. , 2013, American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics.

[30]  G. Janson,et al.  Comparative study of complications during Herbst treatment with Cantilever Bite Jumper and removable mandibular acrylic splint , 2011 .

[31]  H. Pancherz,et al.  Mandibular incisor position changes in relation to amount of bite jumping during Herbst/multibracket appliance treatment: a radiographic-cephalometric study. , 2009, American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics.

[32]  L. Franchi,et al.  Comparison of 2 comprehensive Class II treatment protocols including the bonded Herbst and headgear appliances: a double-blind study of consecutively treated patients at puberty. , 2009, American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics.

[33]  Greg J. Huang,et al.  Classification and treatment of Class II subdivision malocclusions. , 2014, American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics.

[34]  A. P. Ferreira,et al.  Fixed functional appliances--a classification. , 2000, The Functional orthodontist.

[35]  I. Aras,et al.  Class II subdivision treatment with the Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device vs intermaxillary elastics. , 2017, The Angle orthodontist.

[36]  J. McNamara,et al.  Clinical management of the bonded Herbst appliance. , 1983, Journal of clinical orthodontics : JCO.

[37]  William Vogt.  The Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device. , 2006, Journal of clinical orthodontics : JCO.

[38]  P. Major,et al.  Short-term skeletal and dental effects of the Xbow appliance as measured on lateral cephalograms. , 2009, American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics.

[39]  U. Hägg,et al.  Temporomandibular response to early and late removal of bite-jumping devices. , 2003, European journal of orthodontics.

[40]  Y. Mostafa,et al.  Fixed functional appliances with multibracket appliances have no skeletal effect on the mandible: A systematic review and meta-analysis. , 2016, American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics.

[41]  C. Kober,et al.  Topography and Morphology of the Mandibular Condyle during Fixed Functional Orthopedic Treatment – a Magnetic Resonance Imaging Study* , 2007, Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics / Fortschritte der Kieferorthopädie.

[42]  A. Rabie,et al.  Stepwise advancement Herbst appliance versus mandibular sagittal split osteotomy. Treatment effects and long-term stability of adult Class II patients. , 2009, The Angle orthodontist.