Changes in soft tissue facial profile of class II skeletal malocclusion patients with retrognathic mandible treated with twin block appliance

Ng Hui Lin; Eky Setiawan Soeria Soemantri; Gita Gayatri

doi:10.24198/pjd.vol31no1.21154

Changes in soft tissue facial profile of class II skeletal malocclusion patients with retrognathic mandible treated with twin block appliance

Ng Hui Lin, Eky Setiawan Soeria Soemantri, Gita Gayatri

Abstract

Introduction: The soft tissue aspect in orthodontics treatment has gained attention in the last few years. The soft tissue profile is said to reflect the underlying skeletal profile, which causes a convex profile in patients with class II skeletal malocclusion. This research was aimed to determine the changes in the soft tissue facial profile of class II skeletal malocclusion patients with retrognathic mandible after twin block treatment. Methods: The type of research used in this study was retrospective descriptive research with paired t-test. The population was children aged 10-13 years old with class II skeletal malocclusion that were treated with twin block appliance in the Faculty of Dentistry Universitas Padjadjaran, Indonesia. The results of soft tissue changes before and after twin block treatment were compared. Results: There was an insignificant increase in soft tissue profile angle and Holdaway’s soft tissue angle after twin block treatment (p > 0.05). Whereas, Holdaway’s H-angle was decreasing and Merrifield’s Z-angle was increasing after twin block treatment, with statistically significant difference (p < 0.05). Conclusion: There was a decrease of H-angle, indicates a reduction in facial convexity and improvement of the facial profile after twin block treatment, but no difference in soft tissue profile angle and Holdaway’s soft tissue angle after twin block treatment.

Keywords: Facial soft tissue profile, class II skeletal malocclusion, retrognathic mandible, twin block appliance

Keywords

Facial soft tissue profile, class II skeletal malocclusion, retrognathic mandible, twin block appliance

Full Text:

PDF

References

Nanda R. Esthetics and Biomechanics in Orthodontics. Elsevier Health Sciences 2012: 54.

McNamara JA. Components of class II malocclusion in children 8-10 years of age. The Angle Orthodontist. 1981; 51(3):177-202.

Singh MG, Vashisth P, Chaudhary S, Sinha A. Early treatment outcomes of class II malocclusion with twin-block facial profile and cephalometric changes. Journal of Oral Biology and Craniofacial Research. 2012; 2(1): 61–6.

Abu Arqoub SH, Al-Khateeb SN. Perception of facial profile attractiveness of different antero-posterior and vertical proportions. European Journal of Orthodontics. 2011; 33(1): 103–11.

Saptarini R, Gartika M, Runkat J. Penggunaan Twin Block pada perawatan maloklusi kelas II angle anak-anak. Journal of Dentistry Indonesia. 2005; 12(2): 50-54.

Bishara SE. Textbook of Orthodontics. Saunders. 2001: 335-351.

Clark W. Twin Block Functinal Therapy. Jp Medical Ltd UK. 2014: 7-15.

Stephanos MSR, Facial Profile Self-Identification. Proquest 2007: 12-13.

Shell TL, Woods MG. Perception of facial esthetics: a comparison of similar class II cases treated with attempted growth modification or later orthognathic surgery. The Angle Orthodontist. 2003; 73(4): 365-373.

Jena AK, Duggal R. Treatment effects of twin-block and mandibular protraction appliance- IV in the correctio of class II malocclusion. The Angle Orthodontist. 2010; 80(3): 485-491.

Franchi L, Pavoni C, Faltin K Jr, McNamara JA Jr, Cozza MP. Long-term skeletal and dental effects and treatment timing for functional appliances in class II malocclusion. The Angle Orthodontist. 2013; 83(2), 334-340.

Flores-Mir C, Major MP, Major PW. Soft tissue changes with fixed functional appliances in class II division 1. The Angle Orthodontist. 2006; 76(4): 712-720.

Merrifield LL. The profile line as an aid in critically evaluating facial esthetics. Am J Orthodontics. 1966; 52(11), 804-822.

Varlik SK, Gültan A, Tümer N. Comparison of the effects of twin block and activator treatment on the soft tissue profile. European Journal of Orthodontics. 2008; 30(2008): 128-134.

Holdaway RA. A soft-tissue cephalometric analysis and its use in orthodontic treatment planning: Part II. American Journal of Orthodontics. 1984; 85: 279-293.

Basciftci FA, Uysal T, Buyukerkmen A, Demir A. The influence of extraction treatment on Holdaway soft-tisse measurements. The Angle Orthodontist. 2004; 74(2): 167-173.

Baysal A, Uysal T. Soft tissue effects of twin block and herbst appliances in patients with class II division 1 mandibular retrognathy. European Journal of Orthodontics. 2013; 35(1): 71-81.

Sharma AK, Sachdev V, Singla A, Kirtaniya BC. Skeletal and dentoalveolar changes concurrent to use of twin block appliance in class II division I cases with a deficient mandible: A cephalometric study. Journal of Indian Society of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry. 2012; 30(3): 218-226.

Subtelny JD. The soft tissue profile, growth and treatment changes. The Angle Orthodontist. 1961; 31(2), 105- 122.

Janardhanan, K., S Tamizharasi, KP Senthil Kumar. Soft tissue cephalometric changes after correction of skeletal class II with Twin Block functional appliance therapy: A pilot study. Journal of Indian Academy of Dental Specialist Researchers. 2014; 1(2): 50-52.

Khoja A, Fida M,Shaikh A. Cephalometric evaluation of the effects of the Twin Block appliance in subjects with class II, divison 1 malocclusion amongst different cervical vertebral maturation stages. Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics. 2016; 21(3): 73-84.

Chaudhary D.C., Kumar P, Sharma M, Nehra K. Comparative evaluation of soft tissue changes one year post-treatment in Twin Block and FORSUS FRD treated patients. Med J Armed Forces India. 2016; 72(4): 362-366.

Kusnoto H. Penggunaan cephalometri radiografi dalam bidang orthodonti. Jakarta: Penerbit Universitas Trisakti; 1977.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.24198/pjd.vol31no1.21154