SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Aydın Dental Journal / 2026 / Cilt: 12 Sayı: 2

Management of Class II Malocclusion with Fixed and Removable Functional Appliances: 3 Case Reports

Sabit ve Hareketli Fonksiyonel Apareyler ile Sınıf II Maloklüzyonun Tedavisi: 3 Olgu Sunumu

Büşra Kibar(TRAKYA ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0009-0002-9991-8243
Pamir Meriç(TRAKYA UNIVERSITY)0000-0002-4655-5664
Pages
161–171
Publication Date
2026-08-29
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

These cases suggest that individualized selection of functional appliances combined with fixed orthodontic treatment can provide successful outcomes in patients with skeletal Class II malocclusion.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objectives: This case report presents the treatment outcomes of 3 patients with skeletal Class II malocclusion managed using different functional appliances followed by fixed orthodontic treatment.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Case Report: Three patients diagnosed with skeletal Class II malocclusion were treated with different functional appliances according to their individual clinical characteristics.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:These cases suggest that individualized selection of functional appliances combined with fixed orthodontic treatment can provide successful outcomes in patients with skeletal Class II malocclusion.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Bionatör · Herbst apareyi · Sabit fonksiyonel aparey

Abstract

Objectives: This case report presents the treatment outcomes of 3 patients with skeletal Class II malocclusion managed using different functional appliances followed by fixed orthodontic treatment. Case Report: Three patients diagnosed with skeletal Class II malocclusion were treated with different functional appliances according to their individual clinical characteristics. After completion of the functional phase, comprehensive fixed orthodontic treatment was performed. Treatment outcomes were evaluated using clinical photographs, dental models, radiographs, and cephalometric analyses. Conclusion: All treatment protocols resulted in improvement of the sagittal skeletal relationship, correction of the Class II malocclusion, and achievement of functional occlusion with satisfactory facial esthetics. These cases suggest that individualized selection of functional appliances combined with fixed orthodontic treatment can provide successful outcomes in patients with skeletal Class II malocclusion.

Özet

Amaç: Bu olgu sunumunun amacı, farklı fonksiyonel apareylerle tedavi edilen ve ardından sabit ortodontik tedavi uygulanan iskeletsel Sınıf II maloklüzyonlu 3 hastanın tedavi sonuçlarını sunmaktır. Olgu Sunumu: İskeletsel Sınıf II maloklüzyon tanısı alan 3 hasta, bireysel klinik özellikleri doğrultusunda farklı fonksiyonel apareylerle tedavi edildi. Fonksiyonel tedavi fazının tamamlanmasının ardından tüm hastalara kapsamlı sabit ortodontik tedavi uygulandı. Tedavi sonuçları; klinik fotoğraflar, dental modeller, radyografiler ve sefalometrik analizler kullanılarak değerlendirildi. Sonuç: Tüm tedavi protokolleri sagittal iskeletsel ilişkide iyileşme, Sınıf II maloklüzyonun düzeltilmesi ve tatmin edici yüz estetiği ile fonksiyonel oklüzyonun elde edilmesini sağladı. Bu olgular, hasta özelliklerine göre bireyselleştirilerek seçilen fonksiyonel apareylerin sabit ortodontik tedavi ile kombine edildiğinde, iskeletsel Sınıf II maloklüzyonların tedavisinde başarılı sonuçlar sağlayabileceğini göstermektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Kibar, B., Meriç, P. (2026). Management of Class II Malocclusion with Fixed and Removable Functional Appliances: 3 Case Reports. Aydın Dental Journal, Cilt: 12 Sayı: 2, 161–171. https://ajindex.com/articles/1458361

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (19)

  1. Janson G, de Lima KJ, Woodside DG, Metaxas A, de Freitas MR, Henriques JF. Class II subdivision malocclusion types and evaluation of their asymmetries. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2007;131(1):57-66.
  2. Agronin KJ, Kokich VG. Displacement of the glenoid fossa: A cephalometric evaluation of growth during treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1987;91(1):42-48.
  3. Portelli M, Gatto E, Matarese G, et al. Unilateral condylar hyperplasia: Diagnosis, clinical aspects and operative treatment. A case report. Eur J Paediatr Dent 2015;16(2):99-102.
  4. Bennett JC. Orthodontic Management of Uncrowded Class II Division 1 Malocclusion in Children. St Louis: Mosby; 2006.
  5. Clark WJ. The twin block technique. A functional orthopedic appliance system. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1988;93(1):1-18.
  6. DiBiase AT, Cobourne MT, Lee RT. The use of functional appliances in contemporary orthodontic practice. Br Dent J 2015;218(3):123- 128.
  7. Wahl N. Orthodontics in 3 millennia. Chapter 9: Functional appliances to midcentury. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2006;129(6):829- 833.
  8. Papadopoulos MA. Overview of the intermaxillary noncompliance appliance. In: Papadopoulos MA, editor. Orthodontic Treatment of the Class II Noncompliant Patient. 1st ed. Philadelphia: Mosby Elsevier; 2006. p.21-32.
  9. Pancherz H, Ruf S. The Herbst appliance: Research-based updated clinical possibilities. World J Orthod 2000;1(1):17-31.
  10. Spalding PM. Treatment of Class II malocclusions. In: Bishara SE, editor. Textbook of Orthodontics. Philadelphia: WB Saunders; 2001. p.324-374.
  11. Papadopoulos MA. Orthodontic Treatment of the Class II Noncompliant Patient. 1st ed. Philadelphia: Mosby Elsevier; 2006.
  12. Taylor KL, Evangelista K, Muniz L, et al. Threedimensional comparison of the skeletal and dentoalveolar effects of the Herbst and Pendulum appliances followed by fixed appliances: A CBCT study. Orthod Craniofac Res 2020;23(1):72-81.
  13. Proffit WR, Fields HW, Larson B, Sarver DM. Contemporary Orthodontics. 6th ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier; 2019.
  14. Linjawi AI, Abbassy MA. Dentoskeletal effects of the Forsus™ Fatigue Resistance Device in the treatment of Class II malocclusion: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Orthod Sci 2018;7(1):2.
  15. Clark WJ. Twin Block Functional Therapy: Applications in Dentofacial Orthopaedics. 2nd ed. London: Mosby; 2002.
  16. Elfouly D, Dumu EJ, Madian AM, Eid FY. The effect of different functional appliances on the sagittal pharyngeal airway dimension in skeletal Class II: A retrospective study. Sci Rep 2024;14(1):19410.
  17. Jha K, Adhikari M. Effects of modified twin block appliance in growing Class II highangle cases: A cephalometric study. F1000Res 2024;11:459.
  18. Franchi L, Alvetro L, Giuntini V, et al. Effectiveness of comprehensive fixed appliance treatment used with the Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device in Class II patients. Angle Orthod 2011;81(4):678-683.
  19. Atole S, Kamble R, Jadhav VV, Kaiser J, Singh S, Tidke S. Revolutionizing Class II Division 1 malocclusion treatment with Forsus appliance: A clinical case. Cureus 2024;16(8):e66930.