English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Aim The aim of the study was to evaluate the cephalometric effects of the elastodontic appliance (EA) in the management of patients presenting with a skeletal Class II/1 malocclusion. Methods Twenty Class II patients treated using the EA (Group EA) were compared with 20 Class II untreated children (Group C). Cephalograms were compared at the start (T0) and after 24 months (T1) after which time, skeletal, dental, and aesthetic variables were evaluated. A statistical evaluation was conducted by applying an unpaired  t- test for normally distributed variables. Results From T0 to T1, the EA group showed a significant increase in lower facial height (LFH), in mandibular length (Co-Gn), in the upper incisor and cranial plane angle (1 + SN) and in the distance between a true vertical line (TVL)-soft tissue B (B’) and TVL-soft tissue Pogonion (Pog’) points. From T0 to T1, group C showed a significant decrease in SN-occlusal plane (PO) ( p  &lt; 0.01), of SN-mandibular plane (Go-Me) ( p  &lt; 0.01) and of total gonial (N-Go-Me) angles ( p  &lt; 0.05); a significant reduction of the distance between TVL-upper incisor (1+), TVL-lower lip (Li), and TVL-Pog’ was shown. No statistical differences were observed between the groups in dental and aesthetic outcomes, except for a skeletal increase in LFH ( p  &lt; 0.05) and in Co-Gn length ( p  &lt; 0.05), which was statistically significant in the EA group. Conclusion In Class II growing patients, the EA induces minor skeletal effects, compared to untreated control patients.

Cephalometric effects of the elastodontic appliance in managing skeletal Class II division 1 cases