European Journal of Molecular & Clinical Medicine

Angle’s class II division malocclusion, being the most commonly occuring type of malocclusion, is challenging to treat especially when there is an underlying skeletal discrepancy. Various fixed functional appliances have been developed over the years by different authors for correction of skeletal class II malocclusion due to retrognathic mandible. Among them a fixed functional molar to molar appliance also known as, Advansync2(Ormco Co, Glendora, Calif)  has been used effectively in the recent past. It is a fixed tooth-born functional appliance with an advantage of allowing concurrent use of fixed orthodontic therapy. This facilitates reduction of the overall treatment duration. A case report of patient treated using this Advansync2 class II corrector has been presented along with the skeletal and dentoalveolar changes observed during the treatment. The effects observed were similar to most fixed functional appliances however the treatment duration was considerably reduced in all the cases.

Background: The present study was conducted to compare Power Scope and Forsus fatigue resistant device in management of class II malocclusion patients.
Materials & Methods: Group I patients were treated with Power Scope device and group II with Forsus fatigue resistant device.
Results: Group I had 8 males and 16 females and group II had 10 males and 14 females. The mean SNA was 81.2 in group I and 80.3 in group II, SNB was 74.5 in group I and 73.1 in group group II, ANB was 5.1 in group I and 6.0 in group II, GoGN- SN was 29.0 in group I and 31.8 in group II, IMPA was 103.2 in group I and 102.8 in group II, J ratio % was 67.2 in group I and 64.5 in group II and U1-SN was 105.4 in group I and 103.6 in group II. The mean time taken for appliance insertion in group I was 624.1 seconds and in group II was 1019.3 seconds.
Conclusion: Both Power Scope and Forsus were effective in management of class II malocclusion patients.

Crossbite is the discrepancy in buccolingual relationship between the upper and lower teeth involving skeletal or dental components. Cross bites can be anterior or Posterior and skeletal or dental and unilaterally present or bilaterally present. Posterior crossbites as and when identified should be corrected since they are known to cause growth impairment. This study was done to report the prevalence of posterior crossbites and gender association in class II malocclusions. This retrospective study was done on case records of the patients who had reported to the orthodontic department, saveetha dental college, in the past 8 months. 1016 class II malocclusion case records in the age range 12-40 yrs were selected for the study, presence of posterior crossbites was evaluated in them and the frequency of crossbites was tabulated and statistical analysis was done in SPSS.The study showed that the overall prevalence of posterior crossbite in class II malocclusions was 3.8 %. single tooth crossbites(73.7%) were more common than multiple teeth crossbite(26.3%). No gender association for posterior crossbites was noted. In conclusion the present study reports a prevalence of 3.8% for posterior crossbites in class II malocclusion and there was no significant gender association.