Journals / Clinical Dentistry and Research / 2015 / Cilt: 39 - Sayı: 3

SINIF II BÖLÜM 2 MALOKLÜZYONLU GENÇ ERİŞKİN BİR HASTANIN FORSUS FATİGUE RESİSTANT DEVİCE APAREYİ İLE TEDAVİSİ: 2 YILLIK TAKİP

TREATMENT OF A YOUNG ADULT PATIENT WITH CLASS II DIVISION 2 MALOCCLUSION BY USING FORSUS FATIGUE RESISTANT DEVICE: 2 YEARS FOLLOW UP

Pages
118–124
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)

The Forsus appliance was effective in the treatment of this young adult patient with Class II Division 2 malocclusion and the results were maintained 2 years after the treatment.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The aim of this case report is to present the treatment and 2 years post-retention follow up of a young adult male patient with Class II division 2 malocclusion by using Forsus appliance as an alternative treatment choice to orthognathic surgery.
📊
Key Findings & Data:An 18 year old male patient had Class II division 2 malocclusion with deepbite.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The Forsus appliance was effective in the treatment of this young adult patient with Class II Division 2 malocclusion and the results were maintained 2 years after the treatment.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

The aim of this case report is to present the treatment and 2 years post-retention follow up of a young adult male patient with Class II division 2 malocclusion by using Forsus appliance as an alternative treatment choice to orthognathic surgery. An 18 year old male patient had Class II division 2 malocclusion with deepbite. Extraoral examination revealed a concave profile with a prominent chin. Upper and lower incisors were retroclined. The treatment was initiated with leveling and alignment by using upper. 016x.016 inch levelling utility arch. Lower incisors were intruded with .016x.022 inch TMA base arch. After 12 months of treatment, bilateral Forsus appliances were placed. Class I canine and molar relationship was achieved and overjet was decreased. Reexamination of the patient 2 years after treatment showed that the occlusion was stable. The Forsus appliance was effective in the treatment of this young adult patient with Class II Division 2 malocclusion and the results were maintained 2 years after the treatment.

Özet

Bu vaka raporunun amacı genç erişkin bir hastada Sınıf II Bölüm 2 maloklüzyonun ortognatik cerrahiye alternatif bir tedavi seçeneği olarak Forsus apareyi ile tedavisini ve 2 yıllık retansiyon sonrası takip kayıtlarını sunmaktır. 18 yaşındaki erkek hastanın Sınıf II Bölüm 2 maloklüzyonu ve derin örtülü kapanışı mevcuttu. Ağız dışı muayene belirgin çene ucu ile konkav bir profil gösterdi. Üst ve alt kesici dişler dikleşmişti. Tedaviye 0.016x0.016 inçlik üst levelling utility ark kullanılarak seviyeleme ve sıralama ile başlandı. Alt kesici dişler 0.016x0.022 inç TMA base ark ile gömüldü. 12 ay sonra Forsus apareyleri çift taraflı olarak yerleştirildi. Sınıf I kanin ve molar ilişki elde edildi ve overjet azaldı. Tedaviden 2 yıl sonra hasta tekrar değerlendirildiğinde oklüzyonun stabil olduğu tespit edildi. Sınıf II Bölüm 2 maloklüzyonlu bu genç erişkin hasta Forsus apareyi ile başarılı bir şekilde tedavi edildi ve tedaviden 2 yıl sonra sonuçlar korundu.

🔖

Cite This Article

GÜVEN, B. A., TANER, T. (2015). SINIF II BÖLÜM 2 MALOKLÜZYONLU GENÇ ERİŞKİN BİR HASTANIN FORSUS FATİGUE RESİSTANT DEVİCE APAREYİ İLE TEDAVİSİ: 2 YILLIK TAKİP. Clinical Dentistry and Research, Cilt: 39 - Sayı: 3, 118–124. https://ajindex.com/articles/147364

References (11)

  1. Bell R, Kiyak HA, Joondeph DR, McNeill RW, Wallen TR. Perceptions of facial profile and their influence on the decision to undergo orthognathic surgery. Am J Orthod 1985; 88: 323-332.
  2. Panula K, Keski-Nisula L, Keski-Nisula K, Oikarinen K, Keski-Nisula S. Costs of surgical-orthodontic treatment in community hospital care: an analysis of the different phases of treatment. Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg 2002; 17: 297-306.
  3. Panula K, Finne K, Oikarinen K. Incidence of complications and problems related to orthognathic surgery: a review of 655 patients. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2001; 59: 1128-1136.
  4. Proffit WR, Fields HW, Sarver DM, editors. Contemporary orthodontics. 4th ed. St.Louis Mosby Elsevier; 2007.
  5. Obijou C, Pancherz H. Herbst appliance treatment of Class II, division 2 malocclusions. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1997;: 287-291. DeVincenzo J. The Eureka Spring: a new interarch force delivery system. J Clin Orthod 1997; 31: 454-467.
  6. Taner T, El H. The Use of Bite-fixer Appliance to Correct Class II Malocclusion: 2 Case Reports. Journal of Hacettepe University Faculty of Dentistry 2006; 30: 72-82.
  7. Ruf S, Pancherz H. Dentoskeletal effects and facial profile changes in young adults treated with the Herbst appliance. Angle Orthod 1999; 69: 239-246.
  8. Ruf S, Pancherz H. Orthognathic surgery and dentofacial orthopedics in adult Class II Division 1 treatment: mandibular sagittal split osteotomy versus Herbst appliance. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2004; 126: 140-152.
  9. Jones G, Buschang PH, Kim KB, Oliver DR. Class II non-extraction patients treated with the Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device versus intermaxillary elastics. Angle Orthod 2008; 78: 332-338.
  10. Heinig N, Göz G. Clinical application and effects of the Forsus spring. A study of a new Herbst hybrid. J Orofac Orthop 2001; 62: 450. Low LE, Moore TE, Austin KR, Burton RG, Marshall SD, Southard KA, et al. Mandibular "tripod" advancement of a Class II Division 2 deepbite malocclusion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2010; 137: 292. VanLaecken 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. de Oliveira JN Jr, Rodrigues de Almeida R, Rodrigues de Almeida M, de Oliveira JN. Dentoskeletal changes induced by the Jasper jumper and cervical headgear appliances followed by fixed orthodontic treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2007; 132: 54-62.
  11. Hansen K, Pancherz H,