Abstract
BackgroundThis study aimed to examine end-of-treatment outcomes of severe Class II Division I malocclusion patients treated with surgical or non-surgical approaches. This study tests the hypotheses that occlusal outcomes (ABO-OGS) and cephalometric outcomes differ between these groups.MethodsA total of 60 patients were included: 20 of which underwent surgical correction and 40 of which did not. Cast grading of initial and final study models was performed and information was gathered from pre- to post-treatment cephalometric radiographs. The end-of-treatment ABO-OGS and cephalometric outcomes were compared to Mann-Whitney U tests and multivariable linear regression models.ResultsFollowing adjustment for multiple confounders (age, gender, complexity of case, and skeletal patterns), the final deband score (ABO-OGS) was similar for both groups (23.8 for surgical group versus 22.5 for non-surgical group). Those treated surgically had a significantly larger reduction in ANB angle, 3.4° reduction versus 1.5° reduction in the non-surgical group (p = 0.002). The surgical group also showed increased maxillary incisor proclination (p = 0.001) compared to the non-surgical group. This might be attributed to retroclination of maxillary incisors during treatment selection in the non-surgical group—namely, extraction of premolars to mask the discrepancy.ConclusionsThose treated surgically had a significantly larger reduction in ANB angle and increased maxillary incisor proclination compared to those treated non-surgically with no significant changes in occlusal outcomes.
Highlights
This study aimed to examine end-of-treatment outcomes of severe Class II Division I malocclusion patients treated with surgical or non-surgical approaches
The objective of the present study is to examine endof-treatment cast-based and cepaholometric outcomes in patients with Class II Division I malocclusions treated orthodontically in conjunction with orthognathic surgery or without any orthognathic surgery
Our findings showed that the cast-grading outcomes were similar between the surgical and the non-surgical treatment groups and certain end-of-treatment cephalometric values differed between the two groups
Summary
This study aimed to examine end-of-treatment outcomes of severe Class II Division I malocclusion patients treated with surgical or non-surgical approaches. Treatment options for Class II Division 1 malocclusions are three-pronged: orthopedic growth modification, masking with extractions of premolars, and orthognathic surgery. A significant skeletal component is usually present in severe Class II Division 1 malocclusions. In these cases, the ideal method of treatment is orthodontic treatment in conjunction with orthognathic surgery as this is the only treatment which addresses the skeletal base discrepancy. Due to finances or personal preference, patients are not always accepting of this option. In these situations, one of the other modes of treatment may be attempted in lieu of orthognathic surgery.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
