Iranian Journal of Orthodontics

Published by: Kowsar

The Effects of Class II Functional Appliance Treatment Are Influenced by the Masticatory Muscle Functional Capacity

Gregory S Antonarakis 1 , * and Stavros Kiliaridis 1
Authors Information
1 Division of Orthodontics, University Clinic of Dental Medicine, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
Article information
  • Iranian Journal of Orthodontics: September 30, 2018, 13 (2); e67036
  • Published Online: December 30, 2018
  • Article Type: Review Article
  • Received: February 2, 2018
  • Revised: May 14, 2018
  • Accepted: May 20, 2018
  • DOI: 10.5812/ijo.67036

To Cite: Antonarakis G S, Kiliaridis S. The Effects of Class II Functional Appliance Treatment Are Influenced by the Masticatory Muscle Functional Capacity, Iran J Ortho. 2018 ; 13(2):e67036. doi: 10.5812/ijo.67036.

Copyright © 2018, Iranian Journal of Orthodontics. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License ( which permits copy and redistribute the material just in noncommercial usages, provided the original work is properly cited.
1. Context
2. Evidence Acquisition
3. Results
4. Conclusions
  • 1. Woodside DG. The activator. In: Graber TM, Neumann B, editors. Removable orthodontic appliances. Philadelphia: Saunders; 1977. p. 269-336.
  • 2. Carels C, van der Linden FP. Concepts on functional appliances' mode of action. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1987;92(2):162-8. [PubMed: 3303909].
  • 3. Bishara SE, Ziaja RR. Functional appliances: A review. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1989;95(3):250-8. [PubMed: 2646914].
  • 4. Vargervik K, Harvold EP. Response to activator treatment in Class II malocclusions. Am J Orthod. 1985;88(3):242-51. [PubMed: 3862347].
  • 5. Macey-Dare LV, Nixon F. Functional appliances: Mode of action and clinical use. Dent Update. 1999;26(6):240-4. 246. doi: 10.12968/denu.1999.26.6.240. [PubMed: 10765761].
  • 6. Baume LJ, Derichsweiler H. Is the condylar growth center responsive to orthodontic therapy? An experimental study in macaca mulatta. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1961;14(3):347-62. doi: 10.1016/0030-4220(61)90299-7.
  • 7. Charlier JP, Petrovic A, Herrmann-Stutzmann J. Effects of mandibular hyperpropulsion on the prechondroblastic zone of young rat condyle. Am J Orthod. 1969;55(1):71-4. [PubMed: 5248058].
  • 8. McNamara AJ Jr, Carlson DS. Quantitative analysis of temporomandibular joint adaptations to protrusive function. Am J Orthod. 1979;76(6):593-611. [PubMed: 117715].
  • 9. Williams S, Melsen B. Condylar development and mandibular rotation and displacement during activator treatment. An implant study. Am J Orthod. 1982;81(4):322-6. [PubMed: 6960720].
  • 10. Woodside DG, Altuna G, Harvold E, Herbert M, Metaxas A. Primate experiments in malocclusion and bone induction. Am J Orthod. 1983;83(6):460-8. [PubMed: 6574703].
  • 11. Rabie AB, She TT, Hagg U. Functional appliance therapy accelerates and enhances condylar growth. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2003;123(1):40-8. doi: 10.1067/mod.2003.45. [PubMed: 12532062].
  • 12. Birkebaek L, Melsen B, Terp S. A laminagraphic study of the alterations in the temporo-mandibular joint following activator treatment. Eur J Orthod. 1984;6(4):257-66. [PubMed: 6595119].
  • 13. Woodside DG, Metaxas A, Altuna G. The influence of functional appliance therapy on glenoid fossa remodeling. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1987;92(3):181-98. [PubMed: 3477085].
  • 14. Voudouris JC, Woodside DG, Altuna G, Angelopoulos G, Bourque PJ, Lacouture CY, et al. Condyle-fossa modifications and muscle interactions during Herbst treatment, part 2. Results and conclusions. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2003;124(1):13-29. doi: 10.1016/S0889540603001501. [PubMed: 12867894].
  • 15. Jakobsson SO. Cephalometric evaluation of treatment effect on class II, division I malocclusions. Am J Orthod. 1967;53(6):446-57. [PubMed: 5229868].
  • 16. Harvold EP, Vargervik K. Morphogenetic response to activator treatment. Am J Orthod. 1971;60(5):478-90. [PubMed: 5286676].
  • 17. Jakobsson SO, Paulin G. The influence of activator treatment on skeletal growth in angle class II: 1 cases. A roentgenocephalometric study. Eur J Orthod. 1990;12(2):174-84. [PubMed: 2351202].
  • 18. Pancherz H. The mechanism of class II correction in Herbst appliance treatment. A cephalometric investigation. Am J Orthod. 1982;82(2):104-13. [PubMed: 6961781].
  • 19. Pancherz H. A cephalometric analysis of skeletal and dental changes contributing to class II correction in activator treatment. Am J Orthod. 1984;85(2):125-34. [PubMed: 6594053].
  • 20. Tulloch JF, Phillips C, Koch G, Proffit WR. The effect of early intervention on skeletal pattern in class II malocclusion: A randomized clinical trial. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1997;111(4):391-400. [PubMed: 9109584].
  • 21. Tulloch JF, Proffit WR, Phillips C. Influences on the outcome of early treatment for class II malocclusion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1997;111(5):533-42. [PubMed: 9155813].
  • 22. Keeling SD, Wheeler TT, King GJ, Garvan CW, Cohen DA, Cabassa S, et al. Anteroposterior skeletal and dental changes after early class II treatment with bionators and headgear. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1998;113(1):40-50. doi: 10.1016/S0889-5406(98)70275-6. [PubMed: 9457018].
  • 23. Woodside DG. Do functional appliances have an orthopedic effect? Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1998;113(1):11-4. doi: 10.1016/S0889-5406(98)70270-7. [PubMed: 9457013].
  • 24. Kluemper GT, Spalding PM. Realities of craniofacial growth modification. Atlas Oral Maxillofac Surg Clin North Am. 2001;9(1):23-51. [PubMed: 11905336].
  • 25. Meikle MC. Guest editorial: What do prospective randomized clinical trials tell us about the treatment of class II malocclusions? A personal viewpoint. Eur J Orthod. 2005;27(2):105-14. doi: 10.1093/ejo/cji038. [PubMed: 15817615].
  • 26. Tulloch JF, Medland W, Tuncay OC. Methods used to evaluate growth modification in class II malocclusion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1990;98(4):340-7. doi: 10.1016/S0889-5406(05)81491-X. [PubMed: 2220695].
  • 27. Ghafari J, Shofer FS, Jacobsson-Hunt U, Markowitz DL, Laster LL. Headgear versus function regulator in the early treatment of class II, division 1 malocclusion: A randomized clinical trial. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1998;113(1):51-61. [PubMed: 9457019].
  • 28. Ehmer U, Tulloch CJ, Proffit WR, Phillips C. An international comparison of early treatment of angle class-II/1 cases. Skeletal effects of the first phase of a prospective clinical trial. J Orofac Orthop. 1999;60(6):392-408. [PubMed: 10605275].
  • 29. Wheeler TT, McGorray SP, Dolce C, Taylor MG, King GJ. Effectiveness of early treatment of class II malocclusion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2002;121(1):9-17. [PubMed: 11786865].
  • 30. O'Brien K, Wright J, Conboy F, Sanjie Y, Mandall N, Chadwick S, et al. Effectiveness of treatment for class II malocclusion with the Herbst or twin-block appliances: A randomized, controlled trial. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2003;124(2):128-37. doi: 10.1016/S0889540603003457. [PubMed: 12923506].
  • 31. Phillips C, Tulloch JF. The randomized clinical trial as a powerful means for understanding treatment efficacy. Semin Orthod. 1995;1(3):128-38. [PubMed: 9002910].
  • 32. Illing HM, Morris DO, Lee RT. A prospective evaluation of bass, bionator and twin block appliances. Part I--The hard tissues. Eur J Orthod. 1998;20(5):501-16. [PubMed: 9825553].
  • 33. Hansen K, Pancherz H. Long-term effects of Herbst treatment in relation to normal growth development: A cephalometric study. Eur J Orthod. 1992;14(4):285-95. [PubMed: 1516661].
  • 34. Wieslander L. Long-term effect of treatment with the headgear-Herbst appliance in the early mixed dentition. Stability or relapse? Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1993;104(4):319-29. doi: 10.1016/S0889-5406(05)81328-9. [PubMed: 8213652].
  • 35. Manfredi C, Cimino R, Trani A, Pancherz H. Skeletal changes of Herbst appliance therapy investigated with more conventional cephalometrics and European norms. Angle Orthod. 2001;71(3):170-6. doi: 10.1043/0003-3219(2001)071<0170:SCOHAT>2.0.CO;2. [PubMed: 11407768].
  • 36. Koretsi V, Zymperdikas VF, Papageorgiou SN, Papadopoulos MA. Treatment effects of removable functional appliances in patients with class II malocclusion: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Orthod. 2015;37(4):418-34. doi: 10.1093/ejo/cju071. [PubMed: 25398303].
  • 37. Antonarakis GS, Kiliaridis S. Short-term anteroposterior treatment effects of functional appliances and extraoral traction on class II malocclusion. A meta-analysis. Angle Orthod. 2007;77(5):907-14. doi: 10.2319/061706-244. [PubMed: 17902235].
  • 38. Perillo L, Cannavale R, Ferro F, Franchi L, Masucci C, Chiodini P, et al. Meta-analysis of skeletal mandibular changes during Frankel appliance treatment. Eur J Orthod. 2011;33(1):84-92. doi: 10.1093/ejo/cjq033. [PubMed: 20639280].
  • 39. Marsico E, Gatto E, Burrascano M, Matarese G, Cordasco G. Effectiveness of orthodontic treatment with functional appliances on mandibular growth in the short term. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2011;139(1):24-36. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2010.04.028. [PubMed: 21195273].
  • 40. Ehsani S, Nebbe B, Normando D, Lagravere MO, Flores-Mir C. Short-term treatment effects produced by the twin-block appliance: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Orthod. 2015;37(2):170-6. doi: 10.1093/ejo/cju030. [PubMed: 25052373].
  • 41. Santamaria-Villegas A, Manrique-Hernandez R, Alvarez-Varela E, Restrepo-Serna C. Effect of removable functional appliances on mandibular length in patients with class II with retrognathism: Systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Oral Health. 2017;17(1):52. doi: 10.1186/s12903-017-0339-8. [PubMed: 28148248]. [PubMed Central: PMC5289049].
  • 42. Katsavrias EG, Halazonetis DJ. Intermaxillary forces during activator treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1999;115(2):133-7. [PubMed: 9971922].
  • 43. Noro T, Tanne K, Sakuda M. Orthodontic forces exerted by activators with varying construction bite heights. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1994;105(2):169-79. doi: 10.1016/S0889-5406(94)70113-X. [PubMed: 8311039].
  • 44. Proffit WR, Fields HW. Occlusal forces in normal- and long-face children. J Dent Res. 1983;62(5):571-4. doi: 10.1177/00220345830620051301. [PubMed: 6573374].
  • 45. Kiliaridis S, Kjellberg H, Wenneberg B, Engstrom C. The relationship between maximal bite force, bite force endurance, and facial morphology during growth. A cross-sectional study. Acta Odontol Scand. 1993;51(5):323-31. [PubMed: 8279273].
  • 46. Braun S, Hnat WP, Freudenthaler JW, Marcotte MR, Honigle K, Johnson BE. A study of maximum bite force during growth and development. Angle Orthod. 1996;66(4):261-4. doi: 10.1043/0003-3219(1996)066<0261:ASOMBF>2.3.CO;2. [PubMed: 8863960].
  • 47. Ingervall B, Minder C. Correlation between maximum bite force and facial morphology in children. Angle Orthod. 1997;67(6):415-22. discussion 423-4. doi: 10.1043/0003-3219(1997)067<0415:CBMBFA>2.3.CO;2. [PubMed: 9428959].
  • 48. Raadsheer MC, Kiliaridis S, Van Eijden TM, Van Ginkel FC, Prahl-Andersen B. Masseter muscle thickness in growing individuals and its relation to facial morphology. Arch Oral Biol. 1996;41(4):323-32. [PubMed: 8771323].
  • 49. Kiliaridis S. A step towards the postempirical era of functional dentofacial orthopaedics. In: Carels C, Willems G, editors. The future of orthodontics. Lueven, Belgium: Cornell University Press; 1998.
  • 50. Lauweryns I, Carels C, Marchal G, Bellon E, Hermans R, Vlietinck R. Magnetic resonance imaging of the masseter muscle: A preliminary genetic study in monozygotic and dizygotic twins. J Craniofac Genet Dev Biol. 1995;15(1):26-34. [PubMed: 7601911].
  • 51. Kiliaridis S, Mills CM, Antonarakis GS. Masseter muscle thickness as a predictive variable in treatment outcome of the twin-block appliance and masseteric thickness changes during treatment. Orthod Craniofac Res. 2010;13(4):203-13. doi: 10.1111/j.1601-6343.2010.01496.x. [PubMed: 21040463].
  • 52. Antonarakis GS, Kjellberg H, Kiliaridis S. Predictive value of molar bite force on class II functional appliance treatment outcomes. Eur J Orthod. 2012;34(2):244-9. doi: 10.1093/ejo/cjq184. [PubMed: 21411476].
  • 53. Antonarakis GS, Kiliaridis S. Predictive value of masseter muscle thickness and bite force on class II functional appliance treatment: A prospective controlled study. Eur J Orthod. 2015;37(6):570-7. doi: 10.1093/ejo/cju089. [PubMed: 25582592].
  • 54. Antonarakis GS, Kjellberg H, Kiliaridis S. Bite force and its association with stability following class II/1 functional appliance treatment. Eur J Orthod. 2013;35(4):434-41. doi: 10.1093/ejo/cjs038. [PubMed: 22828079].
  • 55. Hunt NP. Introduction. Semin Orthod. 2010;16(2):91. doi: 10.1053/j.sodo.2010.02.009.
  • 56. Atchley WR, Hall BK. A model for development and evolution of complex morphological structures. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc. 1991;66(2):101-57. [PubMed: 1863686].
  • 57. Mavropoulos A, Bresin A, Kiliaridis S. Morphometric analysis of the mandible in growing rats with different masticatory functional demands: adaptation to an upper posterior bite block. Eur J Oral Sci. 2004;112(3):259-66. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0722.2004.00129.x. [PubMed: 15154925].
  • 58. Benington PC, Gardener JE, Hunt NP. Masseter muscle volume measured using ultrasonography and its relationship with facial morphology. Eur J Orthod. 1999;21(6):659-70. [PubMed: 10665195].
  • 59. Ingervall B, Helkimo E. Masticatory muscle force and facial morphology in man. Arch Oral Biol. 1978;23(3):203-6. [PubMed: 278554].
  • 60. Franchi L, Baccetti T. Prediction of individual mandibular changes induced by functional jaw orthopedics followed by fixed appliances in class II patients. Angle Orthod. 2006;76(6):950-4. doi: 10.2319/110205-385. [PubMed: 17090170].
  • 61. Dudic A, Giannopoulou C, Kiliaridis S. Factors related to the rate of orthodontically induced tooth movement. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2013;143(5):616-21. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2012.12.009. [PubMed: 23631963].
  • 62. White SC. Oral radiographic predictors of osteoporosis. Dentomaxillofac Radiol. 2002;31(2):84-92. doi: 10.1038/sj.dmfr.4600674. [PubMed: 12076061].
  • 63. Jonasson G, Kiliaridis S. The association between the masseter muscle, the mandibular alveolar bone mass and thickness in dentate women. Arch Oral Biol. 2004;49(12):1001-6. doi: 10.1016/j.archoralbio.2004.07.005. [PubMed: 15485642].
  • 64. Bridges T, King G, Mohammed A. The effect of age on tooth movement and mineral density in the alveolar tissues of the rat. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1988;93(3):245-50. [PubMed: 3422781].
  • 65. Hashimoto M, Hotokezaka H, Sirisoontorn I, Nakano T, Arita K, Tanaka M, et al. The effect of bone morphometric changes on orthodontic tooth movement in an osteoporotic animal model. Angle Orthod. 2013;83(5):766-73. doi: 10.2319/111312-869.1. [PubMed: 23445276].
  • 66. Fidler BC, Artun J, Joondeph DR, Little RM. Long-term stability of angle class II, division 1 malocclusions with successful occlusal results at end of active treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1995;107(3):276-85. [PubMed: 7879760].
  • 67. Herzberg R. A cephalometric study of class II relapse. Angle Orthod. 1973;43(1):112-8. doi: 10.1043/0003-3219(1973)043<0112:ACSOCI>2.0.CO;2. [PubMed: 4509520].
  • 68. Bondemark L, Holm AK, Hansen K, Axelsson S, Mohlin B, Brattstrom V, et al. Long-term stability of orthodontic treatment and patient satisfaction. A systematic review. Angle Orthod. 2007;77(1):181-91. doi: 10.2319/011006-16R.1. [PubMed: 17029533].
  • 69. Maniewicz Wins S, Antonarakis GS, Kiliaridis S. Predictive factors of sagittal stability after treatment of class II malocclusions. Angle Orthod. 2016;86(6):1033-41. doi: 10.2319/052415-350.1. [PubMed: 26618887].
  • 70. Blake M, Bibby K. Retention and stability: A review of the literature. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1998;114(3):299-306. [PubMed: 9743135].
  • 71. Ormiston JP, Huang GJ, Little RM, Decker JD, Seuk GD. Retrospective analysis of long-term stable and unstable orthodontic treatment outcomes. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2005;128(5):568-74. quiz 669. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2004.07.047. [PubMed: 16286203].
  • 72. Dyer KC, Vaden JL, Harris EF. Relapse revisited--again. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2012;142(2):221-7. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2012.03.030. [PubMed: 22858332].
  • 73. Pancherz H. The nature of class II relapse after Herbst appliance treatment: A cephalometric long-term investigation. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1991;100(3):220-33. doi: 10.1016/0889-5406(91)70059-6. [PubMed: 1877546].
  • 74. Nanda R, Burzin J, Kim JM. Factors influencing the stability of orthodontically treated dentitions. In: Hösl E, Baldauf A, editors. Retention and long-term stability: 8th International Conference for Orthodontists [1991, München]. The University of Michigan: Hüthig; 1993. p. 41-6.
  • 75. Ferguson JW. Changes in sagittal molar relationship during and after fixed appliance extraction treatment. J Orthod. 2010;37(1):16-28. doi: 10.1179/14653121042840. [PubMed: 20439923].
  • 76. Gedrange T, Harzer W. Muscle influence on postnatal craniofacial development and diagnostics. J Orofac Orthop. 2004;65(6):451-66. doi: 10.1007/s00056-004-0405-0. [PubMed: 15570404].
  • 77. Pancherz H, Anehus M. Masticatory function after activator treatment. An analysis of masticatory efficiency, occlusal contact conditions and EMG activity. Acta Odontol Scand. 1978;36(5):309-16. [PubMed: 281105].
  • 78. Bjork A, Skieller V. Facial development and tooth eruption. An implant study at the age of puberty. Am J Orthod. 1972;62(4):339-83. [PubMed: 4506491].
  • 79. Pancherz H. Relapse after activator treatment. A biometric, cephalometric, and electromyographic study of subjects with and without relapse of overjet. Am J Orthod. 1977;72(5):499-512. [PubMed: 270283].

Featured Image:

Creative Commons License Except where otherwise noted, this work is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial 4.0 International License .

Search Relations:



Create Citiation Alert
via Google Reader

Readers' Comments