Angle Class 2 Malocclusion
Conditions
Keywords
hybrid hyrax distalizer, Pendulum distalizer, class II division 1 and 2, molar distalization
Brief summary
this study was to compare the changes in arch parameters after molar distalization; hybrid hyrax distalizer versus Pendulum distalizer using CBCT.
Detailed description
Evaluation of maxillary molar amount of distal movement and the amount of anchorage loss Arch length, arch width, arch depth
Interventions
DEVICEHybrid hyrax distalizer
class 2 Angle malocclusion
DEVICEPendulum distalizer
class 2 Angle malocclusion
Sponsors
Mohamed Abdelrhman Shendy Abdelrhman
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
13 Years to 17 Years
Healthy volunteers
Yes
Inclusion criteria
* For group 1(Hybrid hyrax distalizer) Patients suffering maxillary collapse with a skeletal background with unilateral or bilateral posterior crossbite. * For group 2 (Pendulum distalizer) Patients with skeletal class I or class II malocclusion who needed upper first and second molar distalization for incisor retraction or relieving of the upper arch crowding and minimum or no crowding in lower jaw were selected. * All Patients had no systemic diseases that may affect bone quality or interfere with orthodontic treatment, periodontal disease and no previous orthodontic treatment. * Age range was 13 to 17 years.
Exclusion criteria
* Missed upper first molar. * un-cooperative patient
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Angles in degree SNA,SNB,ANB, Molar Rotation | 6 months | Using cbct and cast |
| Arch parameters in millimeter Arch length, width,depth and circumference | 6 Months | Assessment of airway using cbct |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Nasopharyngeal airway dimensions in Cubic centimeters | 6 months | CBCT |
Countries
Egypt
Outcome results
None listed