| Objective: To compare the dental,dentoalveolar,skeletal and soft tissue of lower facial,s effects of twin-block and forsus fatigue resistance device in the treatment of class Ⅱ malocclusion.Methods: We searched the databases such as Pub Med,Embase,Web of Science,and CNKI.The pieces of literature on the efficacy of twin-block and forsus fatigue resistance device in the treatment of class Ⅱ malocclusion were collected.After screening and methodological evaluation,meta-analysis was performed on the included literature with Rev Man 5.4.1 and Stata 16.0 software.Results: Eventually nine pieces of literature reporting 405 patients were enrolled in our analyusis,meta-analysis results demonstrated that there was no statistical difference in the change of SNA angle,maxillary length,U1-SN angle,anterior overjet,anterior overbite,UL-E and LL-E between the two groups.Compared with the forsus fatigue resistance device group,the SNB angle increased significantly[MD=0.95,95%CI（0.29,1.62）,P=0.005],the ANB angle decreased significantly[MD=-0.56,95%CI（-0.88,-0.23）,P=0.0008)] and the L1-MP angle increased slightly[MD =-2.79,95% CI（-3.98,-1.60）,P<0.00001)] in twin-block group.Conclusion: Both functional appliances have the same effect on maxillary bone,upper incisor,overjet,overbite and soft tissue.Both of them can effectively improve the anterior overbite and overjet,so as to correct class Ⅱ malocclusion.But twin-block could induce more mandibular protrusion and improvement of anteroposterior skeletal position,forsus fatigue resistance device group could cause a greater proclination of the mandibular incisors. |
PDF Full Text Request