The mechanism of class II correction during Herbst therapy in relation to the vertical jaw base relationship: A cephalometric roentgenographic study

Angle Orthodontist

Volumn 67, Issue 4, 1997, Pages 271-276

  Ruf, Sabine ^a   Pancherz, Hans ^a  

^a JUSTUS LIEBIG UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

Author keywords

Class II; Dental effects; Herbst appliance; High angle; Low angle; Mandibular plane angle; Skeletal effects; Treatment effects

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ARTICLE; CEPHALOMETRY; CHILD; COMPARATIVE STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; MALOCCLUSION; METHODOLOGY; ORTHODONTIC DEVICE; ORTHODONTICS; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; TOOTH OCCLUSION; TOOTH RADIOGRAPHY;

ADOLESCENT; CEPHALOMETRY; CHILD; FEMALE; HUMANS; JAW RELATION RECORD; MALE; MALOCCLUSION, ANGLE CLASS II; ORTHODONTIC APPLIANCES, FUNCTIONAL; ORTHODONTICS, CORRECTIVE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); VERTICAL DIMENSION;

EID: 0030634808     PISSN: 00033219     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Pancherz H. The mechanism of Class II correction in Herbst appliance treatment. A cephalometric investigation. Am J Orthod 1982; 82: 104-113.
2. Skieller V, Björk A, Linde-Hansen T. Prediction of mandibular growth rotation evaluated from a longitudinal implant study. Am J Orthod 1984; 86: 359-370.
3. Hirzel HG, Grewe JM. Activators: A practical approach. Am J Orthod 1974; 66: 557-570.
4. Tulley WJ. The scope and limitations of treatment with the activator. Am J Orthod 1972; 61:562-577.
5. Woodside DG. The activator. In: Salzmann JA, ed. Orthodontics in daily practice. Philadelphia: Lippincott, 1974: 556-591.
6. Pancherz H, Littmann C. Morphologie und Lage des Unterkiefers bei der Herbst- Behandlung. Eine kephalometrische Analyse der Veränderungen bis zum Wachstumsabschluß. Inf Orthod Kieferorthop 1989; 21: 493-513.
7. Pancherz H, Fackel U. The skeletofacial growth pattern pre- and post dentofacial orthopaedics. A long-term study of Class II malocclusions treated with the Herbst appliance. Eur J Orthod 1990; 12: 209-218.
8. Hägg U. Change in mandibular growth direction by means of a Herbst appliance: A case report. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1992; 102: 456-463.
9. Champagne M. Herbst appliance therapy related to the mandibular plane angle. Funct Orthod 1989; 6: 17-21.
10. Pancherz H. The Herbst appliance - Its biological effects and clinical use. Am J Orthod 1985; 87: 1-20.
11. Björk A, Skieller V. Normal and abnormal growth of the mandible. A synthesis of the longitudinal cephalometric implant studies over a period of 25 years. Eur J Orthod 1983; 5:1-46.
12. Schendel AS, Eisenfeld J, Bell WH, Epker BN, Mishelevich DJ. The long face syndrome: Vertical maxillary excess. Am J Orthod 1976; 70: 398-408.
13. Stickel A, Pancherz H. Can "articulare" be used in the cephalometric analysis of mandibular length? A methodological study. Eur J Orthod 1988; 10: 362-368.
14. Dermaut LR, van den Eynde F, de Pauw G. Skeletal and dentoalveolar changes as a result of headgear activator therapy related to different vertical growth patterns. Eur J Orthod 1992; 14:140-146.
15. Windmiller EC. The acrylic Herbst appliance: a cephalometric evaluation. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1993; 104: 73-84.
16. Mc Namara JA. Neuromuscular and skeletal adaptation to altered function in the orofacial region. Am J Orthod 1973; 64: 588-606.
17. Mc Namara JA, Bryan FA. Long-term mandibular adaptation to protrusive function in the rhesus monkey (Macaca mulatta). Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1987; 92: 98-108.
18. Woodside DG, Metaxas A, Altuna G. The influence of functional appliance therapy on glenoid fossa remodeling. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1987; 92: 181-198.
19. Björk A. Prediction of mandibular growth rotation. Am J Orthod 1969;55: 585-599.