Digital analysis of stomatognathic system morphofunctional condition in patients with distal occlusion before and after treatment with the Twin Block appliance
https://doi.org/10.33925/1683-3031-2022-22-4-261-268
Abstract
Relevance. For many years studies have evaluated the possibilities of modifying the growth of the maxillofacial complex during orthodontic treatment with functional appliances. Despite the large number of studies devoted to orthodontic treatment of distal occlusion in children and adolescents, there is no consensus among orthodontists on the appropriateness, timing and tactics of such treatment.
Material and methods. The article presents the results of the treatment of distal occlusion in children and adolescents aged 7-18 years using the Twin Block appliance. The study included clinical, anthropometric, radiographic and functional research methods.
Results. The course of treatment eliminated distal occlusion in all groups; in Group 1, the length of the mandibular body was 64.4 ± 2.8 mm before the treatment and 69.6 ± 2.4 mm after the treatment (p = 0.016); in Group 2, the length of the mandibular body was 69.7 ± 6.6 mm before the treatment and 72.5 ± 6.9 mm after the treatment (p = 0.019); in Group 3, the length of the mandibular body was 69.8 ± 5.6 mm before the treatment and 74.0 ± 4.3 mm after the treatment (p = 0.005). The temporomandibular joints did not show pathological changes; most patients (70%) did not demonstrate anterior position of the condyles after the treatment.
Conclusion. Orthodontic treatment of patients aged 7-18 years with distal occlusion using the Twin Block appliance is an effective treatment method. The orthodontic treatment with functional appliances is most reasonable during the period of peak growth when significant skeletal changes are possible to obtain.
About the Authors
T. V. Shiryaeva
Moscow State University of Medicine and Dentistry named after A. I. Evdokimov
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Tatyana V. Shiryaeva, DMD, PhD student, Department of Orthodontics
Moscow
N. Yu. Oborotistov
Moscow State University of Medicine and Dentistry named after A. I. Evdokimov
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Nikolay Yu. Oborotistov, DMD, PhD, Associate Professor, Department of Orthodontics; Head of the Department, Clinic of Orthodontics
Moscow
A. A. Muraev
The Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Alexandr A. Muraev, DDS, PhD, DSc, Professor, Department of Maxillofacial and Oral Surgery Dentistry
Moscow
References
1. Sundareswaran S, Ramakrishnan R. The Facial Aesthetic index: An additional tool for assessing treatment need. J Orthod Sci. 2016;5(2):57-63. doi: 10.4103/2278-0203.179409
2. Franchi L, Baccetti T, De Toffol L, Polimeni A, Cozza P. Phases of the dentition for the assessment of skeletal maturity: A diagnostic performance study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop.; 133(3):395-476.e4762. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.02.040
3. Sato K, Mito T, Mitani H. An accurate method of predicting mandibular growth potential based on bone maturity. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop.2001;120(3):286-93. doi: 10.1067/mod.2001.115932
4. Sato K, Mito T, Mitani H. Predicting mandibular growth potential with cervical vertebral bone age. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2003;124(2):173-7. doi: 10.1016/s0889-5406(03)00401-3
5. Mills CM, McCulloch KJ. Treatment effects of the twin block appliance: a cephalometric study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1998;114(1):15-24. doi: 10.1016/s0889-5406(98)70232-x
6. Araujo AM, Buschang PH, Melo AC. Adaptive condylar growth and mandibular remodelling changes with bionator therapy – an implant study. Eur J Orthod. 2004;26(5):515-22. doi: 10.1093/ejo/26.5.515
7. Al-Saleh M, Alsufyani N, Flores-Mir C, Nebbe B, Major P. Changes in temporomandibular joint morphology in class II patients treated with fixed mandibular repositioning and evaluated through 3D imaging: a systematic review. Orthod Craniofac Res. 2015;18(4):185-201. doi: 10.1111/ocr.12099
8. Clark W. The twin block technique. Funct Orthod. 1990;7(4):24-31. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/2076843/
9. Shiryaeva TV, Oborotistov NYu, Polma LV, Persin LS. Estimation results of treatment of distal occlusion with Twin Block appliance. Orthodontics. 2021;96(4):28-35 (In Russ.). Available from: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=48358473
10. Toth LR, McNamara JAJr. Treatment effects produced by the twin-block appliance and the FR-2 appliance of Fränkel compared with an untreated Class II sample. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1999;116(6):597-609. doi: 10.1016/s0889-5406(99)70193-9
11. Drace JE, Enzmann DR. Defining the normal temporomandibular joint: closed-, partially open-, and openmouth MR imaging of asymptomatic subjects. Radiology. 1990;177(1):67-71. doi: 10.1148/radiology.177.1.2399340
12. Kuznetsova TE, Kuznetsova AV, Pronina KS. Functional characteristics of masticatory muscles in individuals with physiological and distal occlusion. The Journal of scientific articles “Health and Education Millennium”. 2012;14(2):19 (In Russ.). Available from: https://elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=19039074
13. Mills C M, McCulloch K J. Treatment effects of the twin block appliance: a cephalometric study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1998;114(1):15-24. doi: 10.1016/s0889-5406(98)70232-x
14. Cozza P, Baccetti T, Franchi L, De Toffol L, McNamara J A Jr. Mandibular changes produced by functional appliances in Class II malocclusion: a systematic review. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2006;129(5):599.e1-e6. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2005.11.010
15. Ruf S, Pancherz H. Temporomandibular joint growth adaptation in Herbst treatment: a prospective magnetic resonance imaging and cephalometric roentgenographic study. Eur J Orthod. 1998;20(4):375-388. doi: 10.1093/ejo/20.4.375
16. Ruf S, Pancherz H. Long-term TMJ effects of Herbst treatment: a clinical and MRI study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1998;114(5):475-483. doi: 10.1016/s0889-5406(98)70166-0
Review
For citations:
Shiryaeva T.V., Oborotistov N.Yu., Muraev A.A. Digital analysis of stomatognathic system morphofunctional condition in patients with distal occlusion before and after treatment with the Twin Block appliance. Pediatric dentistry and dental prophylaxis. 2022;22(4):261-268. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.33925/1683-3031-2022-22-4-261-268
Views:
344
Email this article 
