Objectives: Moderate to severe Class II malocclusions can not only cause esthetic and functional problems but can also lead to psychological problems of varying intensity depending on the amount of anterior-posterior discrepancy and its interaction with the related soft tissue structures. Although there are several methods of treating such malocclusions (extractions,distalization,functional appliances etc), the final goal is always to provide acceptable esthetics and stability. The purpose of this clinical-cephalometric study was to examine the dentoskeletal and soft tissue treatment effects of maxillary anterior teeth retraction with mini-implant (MI) anchorage in young adults having Class II Division I malocclusion undergoing extraction of only the maxillary first premolars in comparison with patients undergoing treatment with a non-extraction approach i.e. using a fixed functional appliance. Methods: 35 patients (mean age 16.5±3.2 years,overjet ≥ 6mm) were assigned to group 1(G1):correction of overjet with MIs as anchor units, or group 2 (G2): where fixed functional appliances were used. Dentoskeletal and soft tissue changes were analyzed on lateral cephalograms taken before and after the correction of overjet. Statistical analyses were performed using the Student’s paired and unpaired‘t tests.’ Kolmogorov-Smirnoff tests and Q-Q plots were used to assess the normality of the data Results: A statistically significant increase was noted in the facial vertical dimensions in G2, but the variables in G1 showed no significant differences (P>0.05). Extrusion and mesialization of the lower molar was noted in G2, whereas G1 showed distalization (anchorage gain) and intrusion of the upper molar. Facial convexity angle, nasolabial angle, and lip protrusion did not show any significant differences. Conclusions: Both the treatment approaches provided adequate decompensation of the malocclusion but had minimum effect on the skeletal discrepancy. There was a dramatic improvement in the facial esthetics in both the groups however the different treatment methods used in the two groups did not yield any significant soft tissue differences. However the treatment time was significantly less with fixed functional appliances.
","abstract_html":"<p>Objectives: Moderate to severe Class II malocclusions can not only cause esthetic and functional problems but can also lead to psychological problems of varying intensity depending on the amount of anterior-posterior discrepancy and its interaction with the related soft tissue structures. Although there are several methods of treating such malocclusions (extractions,distalization,functional appliances etc), the final goal is always to provide acceptable esthetics and stability. The purpose of this clinical-cephalometric study was to examine the dentoskeletal and soft tissue treatment effects of maxillary anterior teeth retraction with mini-implant (MI) anchorage in young adults having Class II Division I malocclusion undergoing extraction of only the maxillary first premolars in comparison with patients undergoing treatment with a non-extraction approach i.e. using a fixed functional appliance. Methods: 35 patients (mean age 16.5±3.2 years,overjet ≥ 6mm) were assigned to group 1(G1):correction of overjet with MIs as anchor units, or group 2 (G2): where fixed functional appliances were used. Dentoskeletal and soft tissue changes were analyzed on lateral cephalograms taken before and after the correction of overjet. Statistical analyses were performed using the Student’s paired and unpaired‘t tests.’ Kolmogorov-Smirnoff tests and Q-Q plots were used to assess the normality of the data Results: A statistically significant increase was noted in the facial vertical dimensions in G2, but the variables in G1 showed no significant differences (P>0.05). Extrusion and mesialization of the lower molar was noted in G2, whereas G1 showed distalization (anchorage gain) and intrusion of the upper molar. Facial convexity angle, nasolabial angle, and lip protrusion did not show any significant differences. Conclusions: Both the treatment approaches provided adequate decompensation of the malocclusion but had minimum effect on the skeletal discrepancy. There was a dramatic improvement in the facial esthetics in both the groups however the different treatment methods used in the two groups did not yield any significant soft tissue differences. However the treatment time was significantly less with fixed functional appliances.</p>","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Upadhyay, Madhur"],"institution":null,"degree_name":"Master of Dental Science","degree_level":null,"degree_discipline":"Dental Science","degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":["Flavio Uribe; David Shafer","Ravindra Nanda"],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2010,"date_issued":"2010-08-24T07:00:00Z","date_published":"2010-08-24T07:00:00Z","updated_at":"2026-07-24T06:31:35Z","subjects":["Overjet; Class II; Mini-implants; Fixed functional appliance."],"languages":[],"rights":[],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://digitalcommons.lib.uconn.edu/gs_theses/32","outbound_label":"Repository record","outbound_source":"dc:identifier"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor","label":"Contributor","values":["Flavio Uribe; David Shafer","Ravindra Nanda"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Upadhyay, Madhur"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2001-01-01T08:00:00Z"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["Dental Science"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Master of Dental Science"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["Overjet; Class II; Mini-implants; Fixed functional appliance."]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["https://digitalcommons.lib.uconn.edu/gs_theses/32"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["Objectives: Moderate to severe Class II malocclusions can not only cause esthetic and functional problems but can also lead to psychological problems of varying intensity depending on the amount of anterior-posterior discrepancy and its interaction with the related soft tissue structures. Although there are several methods of treating such malocclusions (extractions,distalization,functional appliances etc), the final goal is always to provide acceptable esthetics and stability. The purpose of this clinical-cephalometric study was to examine the dentoskeletal and soft tissue treatment effects of maxillary anterior teeth retraction with mini-implant (MI) anchorage in young adults having Class II Division I malocclusion undergoing extraction of only the maxillary first premolars in comparison with patients undergoing treatment with a non-extraction approach i.e. using a fixed functional appliance. Methods: 35 patients (mean age 16.5±3.2 years,overjet ≥ 6mm) were assigned to group 1(G1):correction of overjet with MIs as anchor units, or group 2 (G2): where fixed functional appliances were used. Dentoskeletal and soft tissue changes were analyzed on lateral cephalograms taken before and after the correction of overjet. Statistical analyses were performed using the Student’s paired and unpaired‘t tests.’ Kolmogorov-Smirnoff tests and Q-Q plots were used to assess the normality of the data Results: A statistically significant increase was noted in the facial vertical dimensions in G2, but the variables in G1 showed no significant differences (P>0.05). Extrusion and mesialization of the lower molar was noted in G2, whereas G1 showed distalization (anchorage gain) and intrusion of the upper molar. Facial convexity angle, nasolabial angle, and lip protrusion did not show any significant differences. Conclusions: Both the treatment approaches provided adequate decompensation of the malocclusion but had minimum effect on the skeletal discrepancy. There was a dramatic improvement in the facial esthetics in both the groups however the different treatment methods used in the two groups did not yield any significant soft tissue differences. However the treatment time was significantly less with fixed functional appliances.
"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Dentoskeletal and soft tissue treatment effects of two different methods for treating Class II malocclusions."]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor":["Flavio Uribe; David Shafer","Ravindra Nanda"],"dc:creator":["Upadhyay, Madhur"],"dc:date.available":["2001-01-01T08:00:00Z"],"dc:description.abstract":["Objectives: Moderate to severe Class II malocclusions can not only cause esthetic and functional problems but can also lead to psychological problems of varying intensity depending on the amount of anterior-posterior discrepancy and its interaction with the related soft tissue structures. Although there are several methods of treating such malocclusions (extractions,distalization,functional appliances etc), the final goal is always to provide acceptable esthetics and stability. The purpose of this clinical-cephalometric study was to examine the dentoskeletal and soft tissue treatment effects of maxillary anterior teeth retraction with mini-implant (MI) anchorage in young adults having Class II Division I malocclusion undergoing extraction of only the maxillary first premolars in comparison with patients undergoing treatment with a non-extraction approach i.e. using a fixed functional appliance. Methods: 35 patients (mean age 16.5±3.2 years,overjet ≥ 6mm) were assigned to group 1(G1):correction of overjet with MIs as anchor units, or group 2 (G2): where fixed functional appliances were used. Dentoskeletal and soft tissue changes were analyzed on lateral cephalograms taken before and after the correction of overjet. Statistical analyses were performed using the Student’s paired and unpaired‘t tests.’ Kolmogorov-Smirnoff tests and Q-Q plots were used to assess the normality of the data Results: A statistically significant increase was noted in the facial vertical dimensions in G2, but the variables in G1 showed no significant differences (P>0.05). Extrusion and mesialization of the lower molar was noted in G2, whereas G1 showed distalization (anchorage gain) and intrusion of the upper molar. Facial convexity angle, nasolabial angle, and lip protrusion did not show any significant differences. Conclusions: Both the treatment approaches provided adequate decompensation of the malocclusion but had minimum effect on the skeletal discrepancy. There was a dramatic improvement in the facial esthetics in both the groups however the different treatment methods used in the two groups did not yield any significant soft tissue differences. However the treatment time was significantly less with fixed functional appliances.
"],"dc:identifier":["https://digitalcommons.lib.uconn.edu/gs_theses/32"],"dc:subject":["Overjet; Class II; Mini-implants; Fixed functional appliance."],"dc:title":["Dentoskeletal and soft tissue treatment effects of two different methods for treating Class II malocclusions."],"thesis:degree_discipline":["Dental Science"],"thesis:degree_name":["Master of Dental Science"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-24T06:31:35Z"}