Management of Class II Division 1 Subdivision malocclusion using unilateral bicuspid extractions and fixed functional appliance: A Two Year Follow-Up
Abstract
Introduction: Management of Class II Subdivision cases pose a clinical dilemma and require a careful diagnosis to ascertain the source of asymmetry. Various treatment modalities involving: different protocols of tooth extractions; molar distalization; fixed functional appliances or orthognathic surgery have been proposed for the same.
Objective: This article reports a unique approach for management of a severe skeletal Class II with Angle’s Class II Division 1 subdivision malocclusion using unilateral bicuspid extractions in mandibular and maxillary arches and a fixed functional appliance.
Results: A 13 year 1 month old male in CVMI transition stage was successfully treated. Extraction of #44 was done to alleviate crowding in the mandibular anterior region and #15 was extracted to protract #16 to achieve a Class II molar relationship. A pre-functional Class II molar and canine relationship with co-incident midlines was achieved. The functional phase consisted of a fixed functional appliance (Forsus FRD) for mandibular advancement to correct the severe skeletal Class II. Class I molar and canine relationships were achieved with reduction of facial convexity and overjet. Result remained stable 24 months after treatment. The improvement can be quantified by the reduction in scores of orthodontic indices measured pre and post treatment.
Conclusions: Management of Class II subdivision malocclusion requires careful planning. This paper presents a unique approach utilizing unilateral extractions and fixed functional appliance to address severe skeletal Class II discrepancy and the subdivision dilemma.
References
2. Anderson WA, Marsh CM, Kessel NC, Dunn WJ. Studying the prevalence and etiology of Class II subdivision malocclusion using cone-beam computed tomography. J World Federation Orthodontists 2016;5(4):126-130
3. Janson GR, Metaxas A, Woodside DG, de Freitas MR, Pinzan A. Three-dimensional evaluation of skeletal and dental asymmetries in Class II subdivision malocclusions. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2001;119:406–418.
4. Kurt G, Uysal T, Sisman Y, Ramoglu SI. Mandibular asymmetry in Class II subdivision malocclusion. Angle Orthod. 2008;78:32–37.
5. Rose JM, Sadowsky C, BeGole EA, Moles R. Mandibular skeletal and dental asymmetry in Class II subdivision malocclusions. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1994;105:489–495.
6. Azevedo AR, Janson G, Henriques JF, Freitas MR. Evaluation of asymmetries between subjects with Class II subdivision and apparent facial asymmetry and those with normal occlusion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2006;129:376–383.
7. Alavi DG, BeGole EA, Schneider BJ. Facial and dental arch asymmetries in Class II subdivision malocclusion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1988;93:38–46.
8. Sanders DA, Rigali PH, Neace WP, Uribe F, Nanda R. Skeletal and dental asymmetries in Class II subdivision malocclusions using cone-beam computed tomography. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2010;138:542; discussion 542–3.
9. Minich CM, Araujo EA, Behrents RG, Buschang PH, Tanaka OM, Kim KB. Evaluation of skeletal and dental asymmetries in Angle Class II subdivision malocclusions with cone-beam computed tomography. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2013;144:57–66.
10. Li J, He Y, Chen T, Xu Y, Xu X, Zeng H, et al. Dental, skeletal asymmetries and functional characteristics in Class II subdivision malocclusions. 2015;42:588-599
11. Cassidy SE, Jackson SR, Turpin DL, Ramsay DS, Spiekerman C, Huang GJ. Classification and treatment of Class II subdivision malocclusions. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2014;145:443–451.
12. Hassel B, Farman AG. Skeletal maturation evaluation using cervical vertebrae. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1995;107(1):58-66.
13. McNamara JA, Franchi L. The cervical vertebral maturation method: A user's guide. Angle Orthod 2018;88 (2):133–143.
14. Mahammad IK, Neela PK, Mascarenhas R, Hussain A. A Comparison of Twin-block and Forsus (FRD) Functional Appliance--A Cephalometric Study . Int J Orthod Milwaukee 2012;23(3):49-58.
15. Gulec A, Goymen M. Treatment of class II malocclusion: A comparative study of the effects of twin-block and fatigue resistant device. Niger J Clin Pract 2018;21(12):1557-1563
16. Franchi L. Alvetro L, Giuntini V, Masucci C, Defraia E, Baccetti TEffectiveness of comprehensive fixed appliance treatment used with the Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device in Class II patients. Angle Orthod. 2011;81(4):678-683
17. Janson GR, Branco NC, Morais JF, Freitas MR. Smile attractiveness in cases with Class II Division 1 subdivision malocclusions treated with different extraction protocols. European J Orthod. 2014;36:1-8
The Creative Commons Attribution License cc-by-nc-nd formalizes these and other terms and conditions of publishing articles.
Copyright on any open access article in a SEJODR journal published by Dentitio d.o.o. is retained by the author(s).
Authors grant Dentitio d.o.o. a license to publish the article and identify itself as the original publisher.
Authors also grant any third party the right to use the article freely as long as its integrity is maintained and its original authors, citation details and publisher are identified.
The Creative Commons Attribution License cc-by-nc-nd formalizes these and other terms and conditions of publishing articles.