Evaluation of the long-term effects of SGTB combined with fixed appliances in the treatment of skeletal Class Ⅱ malocclusion in adolescents

doi:10.19439/j.sjos.2026.03.012

Abstract

Abstract: PURPOSE: To explore the craniofacial growth modification effect of two-stage treatment with sagittal-guidance Twin-block appliance (SGTB) combined with fixed appliances on skeletal Class Ⅱ malocclusion in adolescents, and to evaluate the long-term stability of the functional orthopedic effect of this protocol. METHODS: A total of 21 adolescent patients with Class Ⅱ division 1 malocclusion in the growth and development period were included, with an average initial age of (12.02±1.02) years. All patients received a non-extraction treatment protocol consisting of "stage 1: SGTB functional orthopedics + stage 2: fixed appliance therapy". Cephalometric analysis was performed at the initial stage of treatment (T0), after SGTB removal (T1), at the end of fixed appliance treatment (T2), and during the follow-up period after treatment (T3). Changes in craniofacial skeletal, dental and soft tissue indicators at each time point were compared to evaluate the treatment effect and stability. RESULTS: After two-stage treatment, the sagittal jaw discrepancy was significantly corrected (increased SNB angle, decreased ANB angle, reduced Wits value, and diminished overjet); the overall jaw length increased, and the mandible moved forward (Co-Gn, Co-Go, and Pog-Nperp significantly increased); maxillary growth was slightly inhibited (decreased Ptm-A, P=0.013). In addition, the upper incisors retracted, the lower dentition moved mesially, and the molar relationship was restored to Class Ⅰ. During the follow-up period (T2-T3), there was no significant recurrence of skeletal indicators (such as SNB angle, ANB angle, and Wits value) (P>0.05); only slight physiological rebound occurred in overjet, overbite and nasolabial angle, and the overall stability was good. CONCLUSIONS: The two-stage combined treatment with SGTB appliance and fixed appliances can effectively correct skeletal Class Ⅱ malocclusion, promotes the growth of the condyle and mandible, and shows good stability in long-term follow-up.

Key words: SGTB appliance, Fixed appliance, Skeletal Class Ⅱ malocclusion, Adolescents, Two-stage treatment, Long-term stability

CLC Number:

R783.5

Song He, Li Chunying, Wang Fawen, Zhao Ning, Su Hongru. Evaluation of the long-term effects of SGTB combined with fixed appliances in the treatment of skeletal Class Ⅱ malocclusion in adolescents[J]. Shanghai Journal of Stomatology, 2026, 35(3): 294-299.

References

[1] Janson G, Aliaga-Del Castillo A, Niederberger A. Changes in apical base sagittal relationship in Class II malocclusion treatment with and without premolar extractions: a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. Angle Orthod, 2017, 87(2): 338-355.
[2] Khan MI, Neela PK, Unnisa N, et al.Dentoskeletal effects of Twin block appliance in patients with Class II malocclusion[J]. Med Pharm Rep, 2022, 95(2): 191-196.
[3] Mcnamara JA, Brudon WL, Kokich VG.Orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics[M]. Needhamh: Needham Press, 2001: 67-80.
[4] Quek SY, Gomes-Zagury J, Subramanian G.Twin block in myogenous orofacial pain: applied anatomy, technique update, and safety[J]. Anesth Prog, 2020, 67(2): 103-106.
[5] 陈双喜,高美琴.隐形矫治与SGTB治疗下颌骨后退的效果比较[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2023, 32(5): 513-518.
[6] 沈刚. SGTB矫形诱发髁突改建的生物机制及临床意义[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2018, 27(3): 225-229.
[7] Xu F, Fang Y, Sui X, et al.Comparison of Twin block appliance and Herbst appliance in the treatment of Class Ⅱ malocclusion among children: a meta-analysis[J]. BMC Oral Health, 2024, 24(1): 278.
[8] Rusli RO, Achmad H, Kuandinata W, et al.Myobrace versus Twin block in the treatment of Class Ⅱ malocclusion in children: a systematic review[J]. Saudi Dent J, 2024, 36(5): 661-664.
[9] Campbell C, Millett D, Kelly N, et al.Frankel 2 appliance versus the modified Twin block appliance for phase 1 treatment of Class Ⅱ division 1 malocclusion in children and adolescents: a randomized clinical trial[J]. Angle Orthod, 2020, 90(2): 202-208.
[10] Li P, Feng J, Shen G, et al.Severe Class Ⅱ division 1 malocclusion in an adolescent patient, treated with a novel sagittal-guidance Twin-block appliance[J]. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 2016, 150(1): 153-166.
[11] Siara-Olds NJ, Pangrazio-Kulbersh V, Berger J, et al.Long-term dentoskeletal changes with the Bionator, Herbst, Twin block, and MARA functional appliances[J]. Angle Orthod, 2010, 80(1): 18-29.
[12] Cozza P, Baccetti T, Franchi L, et al. Mandibular changes produced by functional appliances in Class Ⅱ malocclusion: a systematic review[J]. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 2006, 129(5): 599. e1-599. e12.
[13] Ricketts RM.The value of cephalometrics and computerized technology[J]. Angle Orthod, 1972, 42(3): 179-199.
[14] 李雨霖, 徐静晨, 蒋晓鸽, 等. Twin-block矫治器对安氏Ⅱ类错患者髁突影响的meta分析[J]. 华西口腔医学杂志, 2023, 41(4): 463-470.
[15] Bastiani C, Bellini-Pereira SA, Aliaga-Del Castillo A, et al. Twin-b;ock and mandibular anterior repositioning appliances effects in Class Ⅱ malocclusion correction[J]. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 2023, 163(2): 181-190.
[16] Ahmadian-Babaki F, Araghbidi-Kashani SM, Mokhtari S.A cephalometric comparison of Twin block and bionator appliances in treatment of Class Ⅱ malocclusion[J]. J Clin Exp Dent, 2017, 9(1): e107-e111.
[17] Al-Saleh M, Alsufyani N, Flores-Mir C, et al.Changes in temporomandibular joint morphology in Class Ⅱ patients treated with fixed mandibular repositioning and evaluated through 3D imaging: a systematic review[J]. Orthod Craniofac Res, 2015, 18(4): 185-201.