Meta-analysis of skeletal mandibular changes during Fränkel appliance treatment

European Journal of Orthodontics

Volumn 33, Issue 1, 2011, Pages 84-92

  Perillo, Letizia ^a   Cannavale, Rosangela ^b   Ferro, Fabrizia ^b   Franchi, Lorenzo ^b   Masucci, Caterina ^b   Chiodini, Paolo ^b   Baccetti, Tiziano ^b  

^a SECOND UNIVERSITY OF NAPLES   (Italy)

^b NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AGE; ARTICLE; CEPHALOMETRY; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL (TOPIC); GROWTH, DEVELOPMENT AND AGING; HUMAN; MALOCCLUSION; MANDIBLE; META ANALYSIS; ORTHODONTIC DEVICE; PATHOLOGY; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; TIME; TOOTH ARCH;

AGE FACTORS; CEPHALOMETRY; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIALS AS TOPIC; DENTAL ARCH; HUMANS; MALOCCLUSION, ANGLE CLASS II; MANDIBLE; ORTHODONTIC APPLIANCES, FUNCTIONAL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; TIME FACTORS;

EID: 79551532479     PISSN: 01415387     EISSN: 14602210     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/ejo/cjq033     Document Type: Article

References (60)

1. Baccetti T, Franchi L, Toth L R, McNamara J A Jr 2000 Treatment timing for Twin-block therapy. American Journal Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 118: 159-170
2. Baccetti T, Franchi L, McNamara J A Jr 2005 The cervical vertebral maturation (CVM) method for the assessment of optimal treatment timing in dentofacial orthopedics. Seminars in Orthodontics 11: 119-129
3. Basciftci F A, Uysal T U, Büyükerkmen A, Sari Z 2003 The effects of activator treatment on the craniofacial structures of Class II division 1 patients. European Journal of Orthodontics 25: 87-93
4. Birkebæk L, Melsen B, Terp S 1984 A laminographic study of alterations in the temporo-mandibular joint following activator treatment. European Journal of Orthodontics 6: 257-266
5. Chadwick S M, Aird J C, Taylor P J S, Bearn D R 2001 Functional regulator treatment of Class II division 1 malocclusions. European Journal of Orthodontics 23: 495-505
6. Chen J Y, Will L A, Niederman R 2002 Analysis of efficacy of functional appliances on mandibular growth. American Journal Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 122: 470-476
7. Cozza P, De Toffol L, Colagrossi S 2004 Dentoskeletal effects and facial profile changes during activator therapy. European Journal of Orthodontics 26: 293-302
8. Cozza P, Baccetti T, Franchi L, De Toffol L, McNamara J A Jr 2006 Mandibular changes produced by functional appliances in Class II malocclusion: a systematic review. American Journal Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 129: 599.e1-599.e12
9. Curtin F, Altman D G, Elbourne D 2002 Meta-analysis combining parallel and cross-over clinical trials. I: continuous outcomes. Statistics in Medicine 21: 2131-2144
10. De Almeida R M, Castanha Henriques J F, Ursi W 2002 Comparative study of the Fränkel (FR-2) and bionator appliances in the treatment of Class II malocclusion. American Journal Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 121: 458-466
11. Deeks J J A D, Bradburn M J 2001 Statistical methods for examining heterogeneity and combining results from several studies in meta-analysis. In: Egger MD-S G, Altman D G (eds). Systematic reviews in health care. BMJ Publishing, London, pp. 285-312
12. Falck F, Fränkel R 1989 Clinical relevance of step-by-step mandibular advancement in the treatment of mandibular retrusion using the Fränkel appliance. American Journal Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 96: 333-341
13. Faltin K Jr, Faltin R M, Baccetti T, Franchi L, Ghiozzi B, McNamara J A Jr 2003 Long-term effectiveness and treatment timing for bionator therapy. Angle Orthodontist 73: 221-230
14. Franchi L, Baccetti T, McNamara J A Jr 1999 Treatment and posttreatment effects of acrylic splint Herbst appliance therapy. American Journal Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 115: 429-438
15. Fränkel R 1966 The theoretical concept underlying the treatment with function correctors. Transactions of the European Orthodontic Society pp. 233-254
16. Fränkel R 1969a The functional matrix and its practical importance in orthodontics. Transactions of the European Orthodontic Society pp. 207-218
17. Fränkel R 1969b The treatment of Class II, division 1 malocclusion with functional correctors. American Journal of Orthodontics 55: 265-275
18. Fränkel R 1973 The artificial translation of the mandible by function regulators. In: Cook J T (ed.). Transactions of the Third International Orthodontic Congress. C V Mosby, St Louis, pp. 310-323.
19. Fränkel R 1983 Biomechanical aspects of the form/function relationship in craniofacial morphogenesis: a clinician's approach. In: McNamara J A, Ribbens K A, Howe R E (eds). Clinical alteration of the growing face. Monograph No.14. Craniofacial growth series, center for human growth and development, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, pp. 107-130
20. Fränkel R, Fränkel C 1989 Orofacial orthopedics with the function regulator. S Karger, Basel
21. Haynes S 1986 A cephalometric study of mandibular changes in modified function regulator (Fränkel) treatment. American Journal Orthodontics 88: 308-320
22. Higgins J P T, Thompson S G 2004 Controlling the risk of spurious findings from meta-regression. Statistics in Medicine 23: 1663-1682
23. Illing H M, Morris D O, Lee R T 1998 A prospective evaluation of Bass, Bionator and Twin Block appliances. Part I-the hard tissues. European Journal of Orthodontics 20: 501-516
24. Jadad A R, et al. 1996 Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary? Controlled Clinical Trials 272: 125-128
25. Jakobsson S 1967 Cephalometric evaluation of treatment effect on Class II, division 1 malocclusion. American Journal of Orthodontics 53: 446-456
26. Jakobsson S O, Paulin G 1990 The influence of activator on skeletal growth in Angle Class II: 1 case. A roentgenocephalometric study. European Journal of Orthodontics 12: 174-184
27. Janson G R P, Toruno J L A, Martins D R, Henriques J F C, de Freitas M R 2003 Class II treatment effects of the Fränkel appliance. European Journal of Orthodontics 25: 301-309
28. Johnston L E Jr 1986 A comparative analysis of Class II treatment. In: McNamara J A Jr, Carlson D S, Vig P S, Ribbens K A (eds). Science and clinical judgment in orthodontics. Monograph No.18. Craniofacial growth series, center for human growth and development, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, pp. 103-148
29. Johnston L E 1998 Growth and the Class II patient: rendering unto Caesar. Seminars in Orthodontics 4: 58-62
30. Lau J, Ioannidis J P A, Terrin N, Schmid C H, Olkin I 2006 The case of the misleading funnel plot. British Medical Journal 333: 597-600
31. Luder H U 1982 Skeletal profile changes related to two patterns of activator effects. American Journal of Orthodontics 81: 390-396
32. Mamandras A H, Allen L P 1990 Mandibular response to orthodontic treatment with the bionator appliance. American Journal Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 97: 113-120
33. McNamara J A Jr 1981 Components of Class II malocclusion in children 8-10 years of age. Angle Orthodontist 51: 177-202
34. McNamara J A Jr, Brudon W L 2001 Orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics. Needham Press, Ann Arbor, pp. 67-80
35. McNamara J A Jr, Bookstein F L, Shaughnessy T G 1985 Skeletal and dental changes following functional regulator therapy on Class II patients. American Journal of Orthodontics 88: 91-110
36. McNamara J A Jr, Howe R P, Dischinger T G 1990 A comparison of the Herbst and Fränkel appliances in the treatment of Class II malocclusion. American Journal Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 98: 134-144
37. McNamara J A Jr, Peterson J E Jr, Alexander R G 1996 Three-dimensional diagnosis and management of Class II malocclusion in the mixed dentition. Seminars in Orthodontics 2: 114-137
38. Mills C M, McCulloch K J 2000 Posttreatment changes after successful correction of Class II malocclusions with the Twin-block appliance. American Journal Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 118: 24-33
39. Nelson C, Harkness M, Herbison P 1993 Mandibular changes during functional appliance treatment. American Journal Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 104: 153-161
40. O'Brien K et al. 2003 Effectiveness of early orthodontic treatment with the Twin-block appliance: a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial. Part I: dental and skeletal effects. American Journal Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 124: 234-243
41. Pancherz H 1982 The mechanism of Class II correction in Herbst appliance treatment. A cephalometric investigation. American Journal of Orthodontics 82: 104-113
42. Pancherz H 2005 The Herbst appliance: a paradigm change in Class II treatment. World Journal of Orthodontics 6: 8-10
43. Pancherz H, Zieber K, Hoyer B 1997 Cephalometric characteristics of Class II division 1 and Class II division 2 malocclusions: a comparative study in children. Angle Orthodontist 67: 111-120
44. Pangrazio-Kulbersh V, Berger J L, Chermak D S, Kaczynski R, Simon E S, Haerian A 2003 Treatment effects of the mandibular anterior repositioning appliance on patients with Class II malocclusion. American Journal Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 123: 286-295
45. Perillo L, Johnston L E Jr, Ferro A 1996 Permanence of skeletal changes after function regulator (FR-2) treatment of patients with retrusive Class II malocclusions. American Journal Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 109: 132-139
46. Reey R W, Eastwood A 1978 The passive activator: case selection, treatment response, and corrective mechanics. American Journal of Orthodontics 73: 378-409
47. Robertson N R E 1983 An examination of treatment changes in children treated with the function regulator of Fränkel. American Journal of Orthodontics 83: 299-310
48. Schwartzer G, Artes G, Schumacher M 2002 Inflation of type I error rate in two statistical tests for the detection of publication bias in meta-analysis with binary outcomes. Statistics in Medicine 21: 2465-2477
49. Stahl F, Baccetti T, Franchi L, McNamara J A Jr 2008 Longitudinal growth changes in untreated subjects with Class II division 1 malocclusion. American Journal Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 134: 125-137
50. Stroup D F et al. 2000 MSc for the Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) Group. Journal of the American Medical Association 283: 2008-2012
51. Terrin N, Schmid C H, Lau J, Olkin I 2003 Adjusting for publication bias in the presence of heterogeneity. Statistics in Medicine 22: 2113-2126
52. Thompson S G, Sharp S J 1999 Explaining heterogeneity in meta-analysis: a comparison of methods. Statistics in Medicine 18: 2693-2708
53. Toth L R, McNamara J A Jr 1999 Treatment effects produced by the Twin-block appliance and the FR-2 appliance of Fränkel compared with an untreated Class II sample. American Journal Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 116: 597-609
54. Tulley W J 1972 The scope and limitations of treatment with the activator. American Journal of Orthodontics 61: 562-577
55. Tulloch J F C, Proffit W R, Phillips C 1997 Influences on the outcome of early treatment for Class II malocclusion. American Journal Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 111: 533-542
56. Tulloch J F C, Phillips C, Proffit W R 1998 Benefit of early Class II treatment: progress report of a two-phase randomized clinical trial. American Journal Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 113: 63-72
57. Tümer N, Gültan S 1999 Comparison of the effects of monoblock and twin-block appliances on the skeletal and dentoalveolar structures. American Journal Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 116: 460-468
58. Van Houwelingen H C, Arends L R, Stijnen T 2002 Advanced methods in meta-analysis: multivariate approach and meta-regression. Statistics in Medicine 21: 589-624
59. Vargervik K, Harvold E P 1985 Response to activator treatment in Class II malocclusions. American Journal of Orthodontics 88: 242-251
60. Windmiller E C 1993 The acrylic-splint Herbst appliance: a cephalometric evaluation. American Journal Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 104: 73-84