Skip Navigation

The European Journal of Orthodontics 1989 11(3):243-253;
© 1989 by European Orthodontic Society
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Battagel, J. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Battagel, J. M.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Profile changes in Class II, division 1 malocclusions: a comparison of the effects of Edgewise and Frankel appliance therapy

Joanna M. Battagel

London Hospital Medical College Dental School London, England

Department of Child Dental Health, London Hospital Medical College, Dental School, Stepney Way, London El 2AD, England

Changes in facial profile following orthodontic treatment were examined, using the lateral skull radiographs of 62 children exhibiting Class II, division 1 malocclusions and an average starting overjet in excess of 11 mm. Thirty were treated by the extraction of upper first premolars and Edgewise mechanics whilst the remainder wore Frankel appliances. Linear and angular measurements were made to record both soft tissue profile and the underlying dento-skeletal structures.

In the Edgewise group, overjet reduction was accompanied by a 2.4 degree reduction in SNA together with distal movement of ‘A’ point and the upper incisor. At the same time both the nose and chin grew forwards. Despite good positioning of the lower incisor with respect to A-Po, both lips finished well behind the aesthetic plane and the resulting profile was undesirably retrusive.

By contrast, the Fränkel appliance produced a more pleasing, well-balanced profile with a more ideal relationship of the lips to the aesthetic plane. Maxillary dento-skeletal structures maintained a more prominent position within the face whilst the mandibular structures moved actively forwards.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Eur J OrthodHome page
S. Akyalcin, S. Hazar, P. Guneri, S. Gogus, and A. M. E. Erdinc
Extraction versus non-extraction: evaluation by digital subtraction radiography
Eur J Orthod, December 1, 2007; 29(6): 639 - 647.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.