Facial Aesthetic Changes in Class II Patients Treated with Herbst or Elastodontics
Author Information
Author(s): Ciavarella Domenico, Luciano Rossella, Lorusso Mauro, Cazzolla Angela Pia, Laurenziello Michele, Fanelli Carlotta, Caruso Silvia, Tepedino Michele
Primary Institution: University of Foggia
Hypothesis
The profile changes obtained with Herbst and elastodontics therapy are not significantly different compared to those in the untreated control group.
Conclusion
Both the Herbst and elastodontic appliances effectively improve facial aesthetics in patients with Class II malocclusion.
Supporting Evidence
- In the elastodontic group, the inclination of the upper incisors increased by 4.05°.
- The Pog–TVL and B–TVL distances decreased by 2.84 mm and 1.79 mm, respectively, in the elastodontic group.
- In patients treated with the Herbst appliance, the inclination of the lower incisors increased by 6.11°.
- The treatment resulted in reductions in the Pog–TVL distance (2.58 mm) and the B–TVL distance (2.26 mm) in the Herbst group.
Takeaway
This study looked at how two different orthodontic treatments change the way a person's face looks. Both treatments helped make the faces of kids with certain dental issues look better.
Methodology
The study compared 40 patients treated with elastodontic appliances, 40 treated with Herbst appliances, and 40 untreated controls, analyzing cephalometric measurements pre- and post-treatment.
Potential Biases
Potential biases due to the selection of untreated subjects from a university dental clinic.
Limitations
The study's retrospective nature and lack of long-term follow-up may affect the results.
Participant Demographics
The sample included 40 patients in each treatment group, with a mean age of approximately 9.2 years for the Herbst group and 9.46 years for the elastodontic group.
Statistical Information
P-Value
p<0.01
Statistical Significance
p<0.05
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website