@article{nokey,

title = {Clear aligners for Class II correction in growing patients: elastics vs mandibular advancement},

author = {Esha Patel and Stacey H. Moon and Heeyeon Suh and James Chen and Sandra Khong Tai and Heesoo Oh},

url = {https://angle-orthodontist.kglmeridian.com/view/journals/angl/aop/article-10.2319-032825-251.1/article-10.2319-032825-251.1.xml?isSearch=true&body=FullText},

doi = {10.2319/032825-251.1},

year  = {2025},

date = {2025-09-25},

urldate = {2025-09-25},

journal = {Angle Orthodontist},

volume = {95},

abstract = {Objectives: To evaluate the skeletal and dental effects of Class II correction in growing patients using clear aligners, with either elastics or mandibular advancement (MA). Materials and Methods: The study included 66 growing Class II patients: 45 patients treated with clear aligners (20 using Class II elastics and 25 with MA) and 21 untreated controls observed over a comparable time period. Nine cephalometric and three study cast measurements were evaluated initially (T1) and the end of treatment (T2) to assess skeletal and dental changes. Results: The control group maintained a Class II molar relationship and overjet, whereas both treatment groups corrected to Class I. In the MA group, statistically significant skeletal changes from T1 to T2 were observed, including reduction in SNA (–1.09°) and ANB (–1.69°), in addition to dentialveolar Class II correction. The elastic group showed no statistically significant changes in SNA and ANB compared to the control group. Linear regression revealed 5.28° of lower incisor proclination with Class II elastics, whereas lower incisor inclination was maintained with MA treatment. Conclusions: Clear aligner treatment with Class II elastics and MA were effective for correcting Class II malocclusion in growing patients that would have otherwise been maintained without intervention. Although Class II correction was mainly due to dentoalveolar changes, a skeletal component was observed with MA treatment.},

keywords = {Class II, clear aligners, elastics, growing patients, Maxillomandibular advancement},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}

@article{Bianchi2023h,

title = {Three-dimensional comparison between the effects of mandibular advancement device and maxillomandibular advancement surgery on upper airway.},

author = {Gurgel M and Cevidanes L and Costa F and Pereira R and Cunali P and Bittencourt L and et al},

url = {https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10314553/},

doi = {10.1186/s12903-023-03125-5},

year  = {2023},

date = {2023-06-30},

journal = {BMC Oral Health},

volume = {23},

issue = {436},

abstract = {Background

The efficacy of mandibular advancement devices (MAD) and maxillomandibular advancement (MMA) in improving upper airway (UA) patency has been described as being comparable to continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) outcomes. However, no previous study has compared MAD and MMA treatment outcomes for the upper airway enlargement. This study aimed to evaluate three-dimensionally the UA changes and mandibular rotation in patients after MAD compared to MMA.



Methods

The sample consisted of 17 patients with treated with MAD and 17 patients treated with MMA matched by weight, height, body mass index. Cone-beam computed tomography from before and after both treatments were used to measure total UA, superior/inferior oropharynx volume and surface area; and mandibular rotation.



Results

Both groups showed a significant increase in the superior oropharynx volume after the treatments (p = 0.003) and the MMA group showed greater increase (p = 0.010). No statistical difference was identified in the MAD group considering the inferior volume, while the MMA group showed a significantly gain (p = 0.010) and greater volume (p = 0.024). Both groups showed anterior mandibular displacement. However, the mandibular rotation were statistically different between the groups (p < 0.001). While the MAD group showed a clockwise rotation pattern (-3.97 ± 1.07 and − 4.08 ± 1.30), the MMA group demonstrated a counterclockwise (2.40 ± 3.43 and 3.41 ± 2.79). In the MAD group, the mandibular linear anterior displacement was correlated with superior [p = 0.002 (r=-0.697)] and inferior [p = 0.004 (r = 0.658)] oropharynx volume, suggesting that greater amounts of mandibular advancement are correlated to a decrease in the superior oropharynx and an increase in the inferior oropharynx. In the MMA group, the superior oropharynx volume was correlated to mandibular anteroposterior [p = 0.029 (r=-0.530)] and vertical displacement [p = 0.047 (r = 0.488)], indicating greater amounts of mandibular advancement may lead to a lowest gain in the superior oropharynx volume, while a great mandibular superior displacement is correlated with improvements in this region.



Conclusions

The MAD therapy led to a clockwise mandibular rotation, increasing the dimensions of the superior oropharynx; while a counterclockwise rotation with greater increases in all UA regions were showed in the MMA treatment.},

keywords = {Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT), mandibular advancement device, Maxillomandibular advancement, Obstructive sleep apnea, Three-dimensional assessment, Upper airway},

pubstate = {published},

tppubtype = {article}

}