Show simple item record

Condyle‐glenoid fossa relationship after Herbst appliance treatment during two stages of craniofacial skeletal maturation: A retrospective study

dc.contributor.authorCheib Vilefort, Paula Loureiro
dc.contributor.authorFarah, Leticia Orefice
dc.contributor.authorGontijo, Henrique Pársia
dc.contributor.authorMoro, Alexandre
dc.contributor.authorRuellas, Antonio Carlos de Oliveira
dc.contributor.authorCevidanes, Lucia Helena Soares
dc.contributor.authorNguyen, Tung
dc.contributor.authorFranchi, Lorenzo
dc.contributor.authorMcNamara, James A.
dc.contributor.authorSouki, Bernardo Quiroga
dc.date.accessioned2019-10-30T15:31:49Z
dc.date.availableWITHHELD_14_MONTHS
dc.date.available2019-10-30T15:31:49Z
dc.date.issued2019-11
dc.identifier.citationCheib Vilefort, Paula Loureiro; Farah, Leticia Orefice; Gontijo, Henrique Pársia ; Moro, Alexandre; Ruellas, Antonio Carlos de Oliveira; Cevidanes, Lucia Helena Soares; Nguyen, Tung; Franchi, Lorenzo; McNamara, James A.; Souki, Bernardo Quiroga (2019). "Condyle‐glenoid fossa relationship after Herbst appliance treatment during two stages of craniofacial skeletal maturation: A retrospective study." Orthodontics & Craniofacial Research 22(4): 345-353.
dc.identifier.issn1601-6335
dc.identifier.issn1601-6343
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/151917
dc.description.abstractObjectivesTo perform a three‐dimensional evaluation of the position of the condyles in patients treated with Herbst appliance (HA) in two stages of cervical vertebral maturation.Setting and sample populationRetrospective case‐control study. Pubertal Herbst group (PHG; n = 24, mean age 14.5 years, CS 3 and CS 4) and pre‐pubertal Herbst group (PPHG; n = 17, mean age 9.9 years, CS 1 and CS 2) were contrasted with comparison groups of non‐orthopaedically treated Class II patients in pubertal (PCG; n = 17, mean age 13.9 years) and pre‐pubertal maturational stages (PPCG; n = 18, mean age 10.6 years).Materials and MethodsCone‐beam computer tomography scans were taken before treatment (T0) and at T1 after 8 to 12 months. Point‐to‐point measurements of the displacement of the condyles between T0 and T1, relative to the glenoid fossae, were performed in the X, Y, Z and 3D perspectives. Qualitative assessments using semi‐transparent overlays and colour mapping also were produced.ResultsThe displacement of the condyles within the glenoid fossae in the treated groups was small (<0.75 mm; P > .05). Relative to the glenoid fossa, condylar position at T1 was similar to T0 in pre‐pubertal and pubertal groups (P > .05). Similar condylar rotations from T0 to T1 were observed in Herbst and comparison groups, and no significant difference was found between pre‐pubertal and pubertal patients.ConclusionsRegardless the stage of skeletal maturation, HA treatment did not change the condyle‐glenoid fossa relationship.
dc.publisherWiley Periodicals, Inc.
dc.subject.otherHerbst appliance
dc.subject.othertemporomandibular joint
dc.subject.otherAngle Class II
dc.subject.otherMandibular condyles
dc.subject.otherimaging
dc.titleCondyle‐glenoid fossa relationship after Herbst appliance treatment during two stages of craniofacial skeletal maturation: A retrospective study
dc.typeArticle
dc.rights.robotsIndexNoFollow
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelDentistry
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelHealth Sciences
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Reviewed
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/151917/1/ocr12338_am.pdf
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/151917/2/ocr12338.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/ocr.12338
dc.identifier.sourceOrthodontics & Craniofacial Research
dc.identifier.citedreferencevon Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, et al. The strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. J Clin Epidemiol. 2008; 61: 344 ‐ 349.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHouston WJ. The analysis of errors in orthodontic measurements. Am J Orthod. 1983; 83: 382 ‐ 390.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceO’Brien K, Wright J, Conboy F, et al. Effectiveness of early orthodontic treatment with the Twin‐block appliance: a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial. Part 2: Psychosocial effects. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2003; 124: 488 ‐ 494.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCacho A, Ono T, Kuboki T, Martin C. Changes in joint space dimension after the correction of Class II division 1 malocclusion. Eur J Orthod. 2015; 37: 1 ‐ 7.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceChavan SJ, Bhad WA, Doshi UH. Comparison of temporomandibular joint changes in Twin Block and Bionator appliance therapy: a magnetic resonance imaging study. Prog Orthod. 2014; 15: 57.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRuf S, Pancherz H. Temporomandibular joint growth adaptation in Herbst treatment: a prospective magnetic resonance imaging and cephalometric roentgenographic study. Eur J Orthod. 1998; 20: 375 ‐ 388.
dc.identifier.citedreferencePancherz H, Ruf S, Kohlhas P. “Effective condylar growth” and chin position changes in Herbst treatment: a cephalometric roentgenographic long‐term study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1998; 114: 437 ‐ 446.
dc.identifier.citedreferencePancherz H, Fischer S. Amount and direction of temporomandibular joint growth changes in Herbst treatment: a cephalometric long‐term investigation. Angle Orthod. 2003; 73: 493 ‐ 501.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSerbesis‐Tsarudis C, Pancherz H. “Effective” TMJ and chin position changes in Class II treatment. Angle Orthod. 2008; 78: 813 ‐ 818.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRuf S, Pancherz H. Temporomandibular joint remodeling in adolescents and young adults during Herbst treatment: A prospective longitudinal magnetic resonance imaging and cephalometric radiographic investigation. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1999; 115: 607 ‐ 618.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRuf S, Pancherz H. Does bite‐jumping damage the TMJ? A prospective longitudinal clinical and MRI study of Herbst patients. Angle Orthod. 2000; 70: 183 ‐ 199.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceVanLaecken R, Martin CA, Dischinger T, Razmus T, Ngan P. Treatment effects of the edgewise Herbst appliance: a cephalometric and tomographic investigation. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2006; 130: 582 ‐ 593.
dc.identifier.citedreferencePopowich K, Nebbe B, Major PW. Effect of Herbst treatment on temporomandibular joint morphology: a systematic literature review. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2003; 123: 388 ‐ 394.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAidar L, Abrahão M, Yamashita HK, Dominguez GC. Herbst appliance therapy and temporomandibular joint disc position: a prospective longitudinal magnetic resonance imaging study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2006; 129: 486 ‐ 496.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKinzinger G, Roth A, Gülden N, Bücker A, Diedrich PR. Effects of orthodontic treatment with fixed functional orthopaedic appliances on the condyle‐fossa relationship in the temporomandibular joint: a magnetic resonance imaging study (Part I). Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2006; 35: 339 ‐ 346.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKinzinger G, Kober C, Diedrich P. Topography and morphology of the mandibular condyle during fixed functional orthopedic treatment ‐ a magnetic resonance imaging study. J Orofac Orthop. 2007; 68: 124 ‐ 147.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLeCornu M, Cevidanes L, Zhu H, Wu C‐D, Larson B, Nguyen T. Three‐dimensional treatment outcomes in Class II patients treated with the Herbst appliance: a pilot study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2013; 144: 818 ‐ 830.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAtresh A, Cevidanes L, Yatabe M, et al. Three‐dimensional treatment outcomes in Class II patients with different vertical facial patterns treated with the Herbst appliance. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2018; 154 ( 2 ): 238 ‐ 248.e1.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAl‐Saleh M, Alsufyani N, Flores‐Mir C, Nebbe B, Major PW. 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: 185 ‐ 201.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRuellas AC, Tonello C, Gomes LR, et al. Common 3‐dimensional coordinate system for assessment of directional changes. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2016; 149: 645 ‐ 656.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceArieta‐Miranda JM, Silva‐Valencia M, Flores‐Mir C, Paredes‐Sampen NA, Arriola‐Guillen LE. Spatial analysis of condyle position according to sagittal skeletal relationship, assessed by cone beam computed tomography. Prog Orthod. 2013; 14 ( 1 ): 36.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMcNamara JA Jr, Franchi L. The cervical vertebral maturation method: A user’s guide. Angle Orthod. 2018; 88: 133 ‐ 143.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBuschang PH, Santos‐Pinto A. Condylar growth and glenoid fossa displacement during childhood and adolescence. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1998; 113: 437 ‐ 442.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFranchi L, Pavoni C, Faltin K, Bigliazzi R, Gazzani F, Cozza P. Thin‐plate spline analysis of mandibular shape changes induced by functional appliances in Class II malocclusion: A long‐term evaluation. J Orofac Orthop. 2016; 77 ( 5 ): 325 ‐ 333.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWoodside DG, Metaxas A, Altuna G. The influence of functional appliance therapy on glenoid fossa remodeling. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1987; 92 ( 3 ): 181 ‐ 198.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSouki BQ, Vilefort P, Oliveira DD, et al. Three‐dimensional skeletal mandibular changes associated with Herbst appliance treatment. Orthod Craniofac Res. 2017; 20: 111 ‐ 118.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHuang CS, Ross RB. Surgical advancement of the retrognathic mandible in growing children. Am J Orthod. 1982; 82: 89 ‐ 103.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceVoudouris JC, Kuftinec MM. Improved clinical use of Twin‐block and Herbst as a result of radiating viscoelastic tissue forces on the condyle and fossa in treatment and long‐term retention: growth relativity. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2000; 117: 247 ‐ 266.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceEaston JW, Carlson DS. Adaptation of the lateral pterygoid and superficial masseter muscles to mandibular protrusion in the rat. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 1990; 97: 149 ‐ 158.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMcNamara JA Jr, Carlson DS. Quantitative analysis of temporomandibular joint adaptations to protrusive function. Am J Orthod. 1979; 76: 593 ‐ 611.
dc.identifier.citedreferencePancherz H. The Herbst appliance ‐ Its biologic effects and clinical use. Am J Orthod. 1985; 87: 1 ‐ 20.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRiolo ML, Moyers RE, McNamara JA Jr, Hunter WS. An atlas of craniofacial growth: Cephalometric standards from The University School Growth Study. The University of Michigan. Monograph 2, Craniofacial Growth Series, Center for Human Growth and Development. The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, 379 pages, 1974.
dc.identifier.citedreferencePerinetti G, Primožič J, Furlani G, Franchi L, Contardo L. Treatment effects of fixed functional appliances alone or in combination with multibracket appliances: A systematic review and meta‐analysis. Angle Orthod. 2015; 85: 480 ‐ 492.
dc.identifier.citedreferencePavoni C, Lombardo EC, Lione R, et al. Treatment timing for functional jaw orthopaedics followed by fixed appliances: a controlled long‐term study. Eur J Orthod. 2018; 40: 430 ‐ 436.
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBatista KB, Thiruvenkatachari B, Harrison JE, O’Brien KD. Orthodontic treatment for prominent upper front teeth (Class II malocclusion) in children and adolescents. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018; 13 ( 3 ): CD003452.
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.