Does Class II Correction Result in Growth Modification?

Abstract

AIM: To investigate sagittal changes of Class II malocclusions with various orthodontic devices. SUBJECTS AND METHOD: (1) Fixed appliance group: 18 consecutive subjects, non-extraction and Class II elastics, (2) Removable functional appliance group: 17 consecutive subjects, Headgear-Activator (HA), and (3) Fixed functional appliance group: 22 consecutive subjects, Headgear-Herbst (HH) with step-by-step advancement and HA. Growth data from a matched group was used for comparison. Lateral cephalograms were obtained at the start of treatment (T0), after 6 (T6), 12 (T12) and 18 (T18) months. Mandibular change was assessed by measuring Olp-Pg and maxillary change by Olp-A. RESULTS: Changes in the maxilla/mandible over 6 months for Groups 1, 2 and 3, respectively were at T6: 0.4/–0.1; 0.2/1.3**; 0.0/3.1***; T12 1.3*/1.7*; 0.1/2.8***; – 0.6**/5.0***; and at T18 1.0*/2.1*; –/–; 0.3/6.6***; T0-T6: there was no difference in the maxillary change between the groups, whereas the mandibular change was greater in group 3 than in group 2 which was greater than in group 1; T0-T12 the mandible in group 3 had greater changes than in group 1 and 2; T0-T18 there was no difference in maxillary change between groups 1 and 2, whereas mandibular change was larger in group 3. CONCLUSION: Growth modification occurred during treatment of Class II: maxillary forward growth was restrained to a similar extent with all three devices. Compared with ‘normal’ growth’, mandibular growth was less for the Begg-group, unaffected in the HA group, and enhanced in the HH group, i.e. it seems that growth is affected to a different extent.