Mandibular incisor inclination in patients with Class II malocclusion: comparison of treatment effects through time

DOI: https://doi.org/10.25241/stomaeduj.2022.9(3-4).art.3


Introduction The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of different treatments on lower incisor (L1) inclination in patients with Class II malocclusion.
Methodology 73 patients (39 females, 34 males) with Class II malocclusion were retrospectively collected from the postgraduate orthodontic clinic. All patients were treated at least with multibracket appliance (MBA) and Class II elastics (CLII) alone (control group), or in combination with the removable-functional appliance (RFA), fixed-functional appliance (FFA), or lingual arch (LA). Pre- and post-treatment L1-NB (mm), L1-GoGn (°) and L1-NB (°) values were analyzed. The analysis of the treatment effect in relation to the outcomes and time were done by the Propensity Score Matching (PSM) method using Cox regression and Survival analysis.
Results Regarding L1-NB distance, patients treated only with CLII elastics have lower risk of incisor proclination, however, the risk may occur from the beginning of the treatment. FFA, RFA and LA present higher risk of incisor proclination, but this occurs later in time (hazard ratio HR= 0.4 RFA/0.22 FFA and LA). Concerning L1-GoGn angle, all treatments have high risk of proclination. However, RFA reduces the rate of risk (p=0.003) (HR=0.22), while FFA increases the rate of risk (HR=0.35).
Conclusion Multibracket orthodontic treatment with CLII elastics alone produces unfavorable labial incisor inclination rapidly. Combination treatment of RFA with CLII elastics delays the occurrence of proclination, while FFA highly increases the risk of proclination. The use of the lingual arch retains the position of the dentition for longer time, however once the lower incisor proclination occurs, it deteriorates fast.


Mandibular Incisor; Inclination; Class II Malocclusion

Updated: May 21, 2023 — 6:50 pm