Skeletally Versus Dentally Anchored Herbst Appliance

NCT ID: NCT04402164

Last Updated: 2020-05-26

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Clinical Phase

NA

Total Enrollment

20 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2018-03-01

Study Completion Date

2020-01-01

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

The treatment of skeletal Class II malocclusion can be carried out through different approaches. One of these is the using of Fixed Functional Appliances (FFA), one of main drawbacks of these appliances is the proclination of the lower anterior teeth limiting the skeletal effect that is originally addressed in those patients.To overcome these limitations, miniplates anchored Forsus FRD were introduced, it showed high success rate in achieving a more skeletal effect with retroclination of lower anterior teeth rather than their proclination. Although Herbst appliance is categorized as the best FFA with more stable skeletal and dentoalveolar effects, miniplates had never been tried as an anchorage source with Herbst appliance in skeletal Class II patients.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

Skeletal Class II malocclusion is one of the most common orthodontic problems, which occurs in about one third of the population. Although there is many skeletal and dental combination that can contribute for the creation of Class II, however, mandibular retrusion is considered as the main contributing factor.

The treatment of skeletal Class II malocclusion can be carried out through three different time intervals. The first is an early treatment before the pubertal growth spurt through limiting the maxillary growth and stimulation of mandibular growth by using headgear and/or functional appliances. The second intervention would be during the maximum growth spurt through harnessing the spurt time to produce a more favorable skeletal effect by using of functional appliances either removable or fixed. Once growth had ceased, the third and last possible intervention would be one of the following treatment options; promoting the remaining growth through the usage of Fixed Functional Appliances (FFA), camouflage treatment and orthognathic surgery.

Fixed functional appliances (FFA) are aiming to stimulate mandibular growth by forward posturing the mandible to correct the skeletal antero-posterior discrepancy. Although there is always a controversy regarding the effectiveness of these appliances, many studies have been demonstrated successful correction of skeletal class II in adolescent patients through their use.

In a way to achieve this, it is recommended to use a rigid type of FFA like Herbst appliance and the Functional Mandibular Advancer rather than semi-rigid appliances like Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device (Forsus FRD).

Regardless of the patient's age, one of main drawbacks of these appliances is the proclination of the lower anterior teeth limiting the skeletal effect that is originally addressed in those patients.To overcome this limitation, mini screws had been used with both rigid and semi-rigid types of FFA. Incremental enhancement in the skeletal measurement has been noted by using them with the rigid type of FFA (e.g. Herbst appliance), however, the effect was still purely dentoalveolar when it came to semi rigid FFA (e.g. Forsus FRD), never to say that the success rate of these mini screws in the mandible is very low when compared with the maxilla which means a more complication and inconsistency in the clinical results.

To overcome these limitations, miniplates anchored Forsus FRD were introduced, it showed high success rate in achieving a more skeletal effect with retroclination of lower anterior teeth rather than their proclination. Although Herbst appliance is categorized as the best FFA with more stable skeletal and dentoalveolar effects,miniplates had never been tried as an anchorage source with Herbst appliance.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Angle Class II, Division 1

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

NON_RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

PARALLEL

Group 1: Dentally anchored Herbst appliance Group 2: Skeletally anchored Herbst appliance
Primary Study Purpose

TREATMENT

Blinding Strategy

SINGLE

Outcome Assessors
another person than the investigators

Study Groups

Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.

Dentally anchored Herbst group

Herbst appliance will be anchored on the mandibular dentition

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Herbst appliance

Intervention Type DEVICE

telescopic appliance for mandibular advancement

Skeletally anchored Herst group

Herbst appliance will be anchored on mini-plates placed in the para symphesial areas

Group Type ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Herbst appliance

Intervention Type DEVICE

telescopic appliance for mandibular advancement

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

Herbst appliance

telescopic appliance for mandibular advancement

Intervention Type DEVICE

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

1. Skeletal Class II malocclusion due to mandibular deficiency (SNA=82+4, ANB ≥4o).
2. Overjet ≥5.0 mm.
3. All permanent dentition erupted with exception of the third molars.
4. The patient should be at the maturity stage of MP3-I (where the fusion of the epiphysis and metaphysis is completed according to the developmental stage of the middle phalanx).

Exclusion Criteria

1. History of any medical problems that may interfere with orthodontic treatment.
2. Previous orthodontic treatment.
3. Clinical signs and symptoms of temporomandibular disorders.
4. Bad oral hygiene.
Minimum Eligible Age

14 Years

Maximum Eligible Age

20 Years

Eligible Sex

FEMALE

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Sponsors

Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.

Al-Azhar University

OTHER

Sponsor Role lead

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Ahmed Abdel Salam Mohamed

Orthodontist

Responsibility Role PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Principal Investigators

Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.

Al-Dany A. Mohamed, Prof

Role: STUDY_DIRECTOR

Al-Azhar University

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

AlAzharU

Cairo, , Egypt

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

Egypt

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

AlAzharU-189

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id

More Related Trials

Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.

Mandibular First Molar Distalization
NCT04229797 NOT_YET_RECRUITING NA