Age dependent treatment response to the Carriere ® Motion 3D ™ appliance for the correction of Class II malocclusion
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.12775/JEHS.2022.12.10.020Keywords
Malocclusion, Angle Class II, Orthodontic Appliance Design, Patient Compliance, Orthodontic appliancesAbstract
Introduction and Purpose
Class II malocclusion is a common anomaly. Both adults and adolescents with Class II malocclusion can be treated. One of the methods for correction is Carriere ® Motion 3D ™ appliance (CMA).
The aim was to evaluate and compare the rate of tooth movement depending on age during treatment with Carriere ® Motion 3D ™ appliance (CMA).
Material and method
The retrospective study investigated medical records of 28 adult and 27 adolescent subjects who were treated with the Carriere ® Motion 3D ™ distalizer to correct Class II malocclusion. Time (in days) needed to achieve 1 mm correction was calculated for each patient, based on the quotient of days needed for Class II correction and the distance required to achieve Class I canine relationship. The difference between groups was analyzed using the Mann-Whitney-U test.
Results
Phase I treatment with CMA lasted on average 5,67 ± 2,01 months for adults and 4,67 ± 1,48 months for teenagers. The mean time to achieve 1 mm correction was 36,77 ± 11,01 days in the adult group and 36,59 ± 26,17 days in the adolescent group. The results showed no statistically significant difference between the two groups.
Conclusions
CMA can be applied to efficiently treat Class II malocclusion in adolescent as well as adult patients. No difference in age related tooth movement using the CMA was found.
References
Carrière L. A new Class II distalizer. J Clin Orthod. 2004;38(4):224-231.
Kim-Berman H, McNamara JA, Lints JP, McMullen C, Franchi L. Treatment effects of the Carriere® Motion 3DTM appliance for the correction of Class II malocclusion in adolescents. The Angle Orthodontist. 2019;89(6):839-846. doi:10.2319/121418-872.1
Alikhani M, Chou MY, Khoo E, et al. Age-dependent biologic response to orthodontic forces. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. 2018;153(5):632-644. doi:10.1016/j.ajodo.2017.09.016
Teixeira CC, Khoo E, Tran J, et al. Cytokine Expression and Accelerated Tooth Movement. J Dent Res. 2010;89(10):1135-1141. doi:10.1177/0022034510373764
Garlet TP, Coelho U, Silva JS, Garlet GP. Cytokine expression pattern in compression and tension sides of the periodontal ligament during orthodontic tooth movement in humans. Eur J Oral Sci. 2007;115(5):355-362. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0722.2007.00469.x
Alikhani M, Raptis M, Zoldan B, et al. Effect of micro-osteoperforations on the rate of tooth movement. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2013;144(5):639-648. doi:10.1016/j.ajodo.2013.06.017
Ren Y, Maltha JC, Van ’t Hof MA, Kuijpers-Jagtman AM. Age Effect on Orthodontic Tooth Movement in Rats. J Dent Res. 2003;82(1):38-42. doi:10.1177/154405910308200109
Bridges T, King G, Mohammed A. The effect of age on tooth movement and mineraldensity in the alveolar tissues of the rat. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. 1988;93(3):245-250. doi:10.1016/S0889-5406(88)80010-6
Nickel JC, Liu H, Marx DB, Iwasaki LR. Effects of mechanical stress and growth on the velocity of tooth movement. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. 2014;145(4):S74-S81. doi:10.1016/j.ajodo.2013.06.022
Schubert A, Jäger F, Maltha JC, Bartzela TN. Age effect on orthodontic tooth movement rate and the composition of gingival crevicular fluid: A literature review. J Orofac Orthop. 2020;81(2):113-125. doi:10.1007/s00056-019-00206-5
Yin K, Han E, Guo J, Yasumura T, Grauer D, Sameshima G. Evaluating the treatment effectiveness and efficiency of Carriere Distalizer: a cephalometric and study model comparison of Class II appliances. Prog Orthod. 2019;20(1):24. doi:10.1186/s40510-019-0280-2
Hamilton CF, Saltaji H, Preston CB, Flores-Mir C, Tabbaa S. Adolescent patients’ experience with the Carriere distalizer appliance. Eur J Paediatr Dent. 2013;14(3):219-224.
Sandifer CL, English JD, Colville CD, Gallerano RL, Akyalcin S. Treatment effects of the Carrière distalizer using lingual arch and full fixed appliances. Journal of the World Federation of Orthodontists. 2014;3(2):e49-e54. doi:10.1016/j.ejwf.2014.03.001
Areepong D, Kim KB, Oliver DR, Ueno H. The Class II Carriere Motion appliance. Angle Orthod. 2020;90(4):491-499. doi:10.2319/080919-523.1
Popowich K, Nebbe B, Heo G, Glover KE, Major PW. Predictors for Class II treatment duration. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. 2005;127(3):293-300. doi:10.1016/j.ajodo.2003.12.025
Aras I, Pasaoglu A. Class II subdivision treatment with the Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device vs intermaxillary elastics. Angle Orthod. 2017;87(3):371-376. doi:10.2319/070216-518.1
Uzel A, Uzel I, Toroglu MS. Two Different Applications of Class II Elastics with Nonextraction Segmental Techniques. The Angle Orthodontist. 2007;77(4):694-700. doi:10.2319/071006-283
Mcsherry PF, Bradley H. Class II Correction-Reducing Patient Compliance: a Review of the Available Techniques. Journal of Orthodontics. 2000;27(3):219-225. doi:10.1179/ortho.27.3.219
Papadopoulos MA. Non-compliance approaches for management of Class II malocclusion. In: Skeletal Anchorage in Orthodontic Treatment of Class II Malocclusion. Elsevier; 2015:6-21. doi:10.1016/B978-0-7234-3649-2.00002-6
Schott TC, Fritz U, Meyer-Gutknecht H. Maxillary expansion therapy with plates featuring a transverse screw: implications of patient compliance with wear-time and screw activation requirements. J Orofac Orthop. 2014;75(2):107-117. doi:10.1007/s00056-013-0197-1
Cole WA. Accuracy of patient reporting as an indication of headgear compliance. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. 2002;121(4):419-423. doi:10.1067/mod.2002.122369
Al-Moghrabi D, Salazar FC, Pandis N, Fleming PS. Compliance with removable orthodontic appliances and adjuncts: A systematic review and meta-analysis. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. 2017;152(1):17-32. doi:10.1016/j.ajodo.2017.03.019
Leone SMM, de Souza-Constantino AM, Conti ACCF, Filho LC, de Almeida-Pedrin RR. The influence of text messages on the cooperation of Class II patients regarding the use of intermaxillary elastics. The Angle Orthodontist. 2019;89(1):111-116. doi:10.2319/011218-31.1
Lee SJ, Ahn SJ, Kim TW. Patient compliance and locus of control in orthodontic treatment: A prospective study. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. 2008;133(3):354-358. doi:10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.03.040
Egolf RJ, BeGole EA, Upshaw HS. Factors associated with orthodontic patient compliance with intraoral elastic and headgear wear. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. 1990;97(4):336-348. doi:10.1016/0889-5406(90)70106-M
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Klara Malinowski, Monika Chodur, Maciej Majewski, Jakub Malinowski
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
The periodical offers access to content in the Open Access system under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0
Stats
Number of views and downloads: 693
Number of citations: 0
