Abstract:Background: Mandibular second premolar agenesis is a common problem in orthodontics and is often treated in conjunction with maxillary counterbalancing extractions. However, in cases without maxillary crowding or dental protrusion, space closure may pose challenges leading to compromised occlusal results or patient profile. Multiple techniques have been described to treat these patients; nevertheless, there is a paucity of data comparing effectiveness of space closure utilizing various anchorage techniques. The goal of this study is to assess the effectiveness of the Herbst device during mandibular molar protraction and compare it to the use of temporary anchorage device (TADs) in patients with mandibular second premolar agenesis. Materials and methods: This retrospective study included 33 patients with mandibular premolar agenesis treated without maxillary extractions. Of these patients, 21 were treated with protraction Herbst devices and 12 with TADs. Changes in molar and incisor positions, skeletal base positions and occlusal plane angulations were assessed on pretreatment (T0) and post-treatment (T1) lateral cephalograms. Scans/photographs at T0 and T1 were used to evaluate canine relationship changes representing anchorage control. Space closure and breakage/failure rates were also compared. Data was analyzed with paired and unpaired t-tests at the significance level of 0.05. Results: Within the Herbst group, changes in mandibular central incisor uprighting and mandibular molar crown angulations were statistically significant. However, no significant differences were noted between the Herbst and TAD groups. Protraction rates as well as overall treatment times were comparable (0.77 mm/month vs. 0.55 mm/month and 3.02 years vs. 2.67 years, respectively). Canine relationships were maintained or improved toward a class I in 82.85% of the Herbst sample, compared to in 66.7% of the TAD sample. Emergency visits occurred in 80.1% of the Herbst group, with cementation failures or appliance breakages as the most common reasons. Conclusion: The Herbst device could be a viable modality in cases with missing mandibular premolars where maximum anterior anchorage is desired, or if patients/parents are resistant to TADs. Furthermore, they could be beneficial in skeletal class II patients with mandibular deficiency who also need molar protraction. However, the increased incidence of emergency visits must be considered when treatment is planned.

Prevalence of temporomandibular disorders diagnosis in patients treated with Herbst appliance: a systematic review and meta-analysis

3D Assessment of Mandibular Skeletal Effects Produced by the Herbst Appliance

Evaluating the efficiency of mandibular molar protraction using Herbst appliances versus temporary anchorage devices: a retrospective case-controlled study

Treatment of Class II high angle malocclusions with the Herbst appliance: a cephalometric investigation

A retrospective cephalometric investigation of two fixed functional orthodontic appliances in class II treatment: Functional Mandibular Advancer vs. Herbst appliance

[Treatment of Class II malocclusion using Herbst appliance with headgear and rapid palatal expansion and straight wire appliance with implant anchorage]

Hybrid treatment of varied orthodontic appliances for a patient with skeletal class II and temporomandibular joint disorders: A case report and review of literature

Mandibular changes produced by functional appliances in Class II malocclusion: A systematic review

Evaluation of the Co-Go-Me angle as a predictor in Class II patients treated with Herbst appliance and skeletal anchorage: a retrospective cohort study

Occlusal Splint Therapy Followed by Orthodontic Molar Intrusion as an Effective Treatment Method to Treat Patients with Temporomandibular Disorder: A Retrospective Study

A systematic review of the clinical outcomes for various orthodontic and physiotherapy appliances used for the management of temporomandibular joint ankylosis

Treatment effects of the MARA appliance and Activator-Headgear combined with fixed appliances in Class II division 1 malocclusion patients: A retrospective longitudinal study

Retrospective comparison of dental and skeletal effects in the treatment of Class II malocclusion between Herbst and Xbow appliances

No Compliance Correction of Class II Malocclusion in Growing Patients Whit HERBST Appliance: A Case Report

Evaluation of Changes in Soft and Hard Tissues of TMJ among Class II Division 2 Patients after Prefunctional Orthodontics and Twin Block Functional Appliance Therapy: A Prospective MRI Study

Effects of a functional appliance on masticatory muscles of young adults suffering from muscle-related temporomandibular disorders

The Efficacy of the RME II System Compared with a Herbst Appliance in the Treatment of Class II Skeletal Malocclusion in Growing Patients: A Retrospective Study

Dento-Skeletal Class III Treatment with Mixed Anchored Palatal Expander: A Systematic Review

Mandibular advancement with clear aligners in the treatment of skeletal Class II. A retrospective controlled study.

Morphologic predictors of mandibular changes induced by Sander's Bite Jumping Appliance

Changes in soft tissue profile using functional appliances in the treatment of skeletal class II malocclusion