CONCLUSIONS FROM DISTALISATION (AND CLASS 2 ELASTICS) AND MANDIBULAR ADVANCEMENT (MA)
- No significant changes in inclination upper or lower
- Mandibular growth enhanced 3-4mm
- No adverse vertical changes
CRITIQUE:
- No controls
- No reporting on buccal segment movements
Skeletal and dentoalveolar effects produced by Aligners and Elastics in Class II growing patients Federico Migliori
WHO
- 14 pts 13.6 years old
- Co-Go-Me 125 – hypodivergent
- Cervical spine C3
WHAT DID THEY DO IT
Invisalign protocols for distalisation
- Sequential distalisation, ½ distalised, following tooth distalised – anchorage
- Class 2 elastics
WHAT DID THEY FIND
- Distalisation achieved in 15 months
- Proclination of lowers did not occur IMPA: -2.2 – reduction
- Vertical control proportions FMA -1.7
- Co-Gn increased by 3mm
Correction of Class II malocclusion in growing patients with Aligners Dr. Simona Dianiskova
WHO
- Age 12, OJ 4mm, ANB 3
WHAT DID THEY DO IT
- De-rotate upper 1st molars – up to 2mm (85% of class 2 cases have rotated upper 1st molars)
- Expansion – usually required
- Distalisation -2.5mm predictable Simon 2014 87%
- Class 2 from outset, no IPR
- Overcorrect upper inc by 5 degrees of palatal root torque – prevent undertorquing
- analysis dolphin – Mcnamama
WHAT DID THEY FIND
- Duration of tx 16-21 months
- Results no change ANB,
- Co-Gn 4 – stat sign
- Witts stat improve -1.8
- Ui and lLi 1-2 degrees change
- No vertical change FMA
Class II malocclusion treated with Invisalign with Mandibular advancement feature and twin block appliance compared with historical controls Dr. Sandra Tai
WHO
- N32
- Age 13
WHAT DID THEY DO IT
- Outcome Ceph study
WHAT DID THEY FIND
- SNB – stat sign for invisalign
- Ui and Li procline 3.5 – stat sign t/b
- No difference in vertical change both
