Download PDF
Informationen aus Orthodontie & Kieferorthopädie 2024; 56(02): 116-129
DOI: 10.1055/a-2282-7113
Übersichtsartikel

Mitarbeitsunabhängige Klasse II Therapie mit der Herbstapparatur – Ein Überblick

Non-Compliance Class II Correction with the Herbst Appliance – An Overview
Jonas Q. Schmid
1   Poliklinik für Kieferorthopädie, Universitätsklinikum Münster, Deutschland
,
Ariane Hohoff
1   Poliklinik für Kieferorthopädie, Universitätsklinikum Münster, Deutschland
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Zusammenfassung

Die Therapie der Angle Klasse II gehört zu den häufigsten kieferorthopädischen Behandlungsaufgaben. Befundabhängig stehen verschiedene Therapieoptionen zur Verfügung, unter anderem eine Behandlung mittels Herbstapparatur, die im permanenten Gebiss - auf oder nach dem Wachstumsgipfel - besonders effektiv ist. Die Kombination mit vollständig individuellen lingualen Multibracketapparaturen kann mögliche Nebenwirkungen des Herbstscharniers reduzieren. Ziel dieses Artikels ist ein Literaturüberblick zum Thema Therapie mittels Herbstapparatur und die Veranschaulichung der Methode anhand von Fallbeispielen.

Abstract

Treatment of Angle Class II malocclusion is one of the most common tasks in orthodontics. Depending on the diagnosis, various treatment options are available, including therapy with a Herbst appliance, which is especially effective in the permanent dentition - at or just after the peak of growth. The combination with completely customized lingual appliances can reduce possible side effects of the Herbst appliance. The aim of this review is to provide an overview of the literature on the Herbst appliance and to present clinical cases.

Schlüsselwörter

Herbstscharnier - Herbstapparatur - Lingualtechnik - vollständig individuelle linguale Apparatur - Angle Klasse II Korrektur

Keywords

Herbst appliance - fixed functionals - lingual orthodontics - completely customized lingual appliance - Angle class II correction


Publication History

Article published online:
19 June 2024

© 2024. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany

 

  • Literatur

  • 1 Alhammadi MS, Halboub E, Fayed MS. et al. Global distribution of malocclusion traits: A systematic review. Dental Press J Orthod 2018; 23: e1-e10
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 2 Hensel E, Born G, Körber V. et al. Prevalence of defined symptoms of malocclusion among probands enrolled in the study of health in Pomerania (SHIP)* in the age group from 20 to 49 years. J Orofac Orthop 2003; 157-166
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 3 Nucera R, Militi A, Lo Giudice A. et al. Skeletal and dental effectiveness of treatment of Class II malocclusion with headgear: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Evid Based Dent Pract 2018; 18: 41-58
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 4 Petti S. Over two hundred million injuries to anterior teeth attributable to large overjet: A meta-analysis. Dent Traumatol 2015; 31: 1-8
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 5 Pancherz H. Dentofacial adaptations to treatment with the Herbst appliance. Semin Orthod 1997; 3: 232-243
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 6 Ruf S. Période optimale pour le traitement par appareil de Herbst. Orthod Fr 2006; 77: 163-167
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 Yang X, Zhu Y, Long H. et al. The effectiveness of the Herbst appliance for patients with Class II malocclusion: A meta-analysis. Eur J Orthod 2016; 38: 324-333
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 Ruf S, Pancherz H. Herbst/multibracket appliance treatment of Class II division 1 malocclusions in early and late adulthood. A prospective cephalometric study of consecutively treated subjects. Eur J Orthod 2006; 28: 352-360
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 9 Bock NC, Ruf S, Wiechmann D. et al. Dentoskeletal effects during Herbst-Multibracket appliance treatment: a comparison of lingual and labial approaches. Eur J Orthod 2016; 38: 470-477
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 10 Ruf S, Pancherz H. Orthognathic surgery and dentofacial orthopedics in adult Class II Division 1 treatment: Mandibular sagittal split osteotomy versus Herbst appliance. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2004; 126: 140-152
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 11 Bock NC, Ruf S. Dentoskeletal changes in adult Class II division 1 Herbst treatment - How much is left after the retention period?. Eur J Orthod 2012; 34: 747-753
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 12 Meyer-Marcotty P, Kochel J, Richter U. et al. Reaction of facial soft tissues to treatment with a Herbst appliance. J Orofac Orthop 2012; 73: 116-125
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 13 Minervini G, Di Blasio M, Franco R. et al. Prevalence of temporomandibular disorders diagnosis in patients treated with Herbst appliance: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Oral Health 2024; 24
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 14 Hourfar J, Bister D, Kanavakis G. et al. Influence of interradicular and palatal placement of orthodontic mini-implants on the success (survival) rate. Head Face Med 2017; 13: 14
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 15 De Clerck H, Cevidanes L, Baccetti T. Dentofacial effects of bone-anchored maxillary protraction: A controlled study of consecutively treated Class III patients. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2010; 138: 577-581
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 16 Metzner R, Schwestka-Polly R, Helms HJ. et al. Comparison of anchorage reinforcement with temporary anchorage devices or a Herbst appliance during lingual orthodontic protraction of mandibular molars without maxillary counterbalance extraction. Head Face Med 2015; 11: 22
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 17 Klang E, Beyling F, Knösel M. et al. Quality of occlusal outcome following space closure in cases of lower second premolar aplasia using lingual orthodontic molar mesialization without maxillary counterbalancing extraction. Head Face Med 2018; 14: 17
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 18 Bock NC, Ruf S, Wiechmann D. et al. Herbst plus Lingual versus Herbst plus Labial: a comparison of occlusal outcome and gingival health. Eur J Orthod 2016; 38: 478-484
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 19 Tepedino M, Franchi L, Fabbro O. et al. Post-orthodontic lower incisor inclination and gingival recession – a systematic review. Prog Orthod 2018; 19
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 20 Tieu LD, Saltaji H, Normando D. et al. Radiologically determined orthodontically induced external apical root resorption in incisors after non-surgical orthodontic treatment of class II division 1 malocclusion: a systematic review. Prog Orthod 2014; 15: 48
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 21 Proffit WR, White RP. Who needs surgical-orthodontic treatment?. Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg 1990; 5: 81-89
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 22 Proffit WR, Fields HW, Larson BE. et al. Contemporary Orthodontics 6th Edition. Elsevier; 2019
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 23 Pacha MM, Fleming PS, Pandis N. et al. The use of the Hanks Herbst vs Twin-block in Class II malocclusion: A randomized controlled trial. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2023; 164: 314-324.e1
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 24 Al-Dboush R, Soltan R, Rao J. et al. Skeletal and dental effects of Herbst appliance anchored with temporary anchorage devices: A systematic review with meta-analysis. Orthod Craniofac Res 2022; 25: 31-48
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 25 Manni A, Mutinelli S, Pasini M. et al. Herbst appliance anchored to miniscrews with 2 types of ligation: Effectiveness in skeletal Class II treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2016; 149: 871-880
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 26 El-Fateh T, Ruf S. Herbst treatment with mandibular cast splints - Revisited. Angle Orthod 2011; 81: 820-827
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 27 Von Bremen J, Ludwig B, Ruf S. Anchorage loss due to Herbst mechanics-preventable through miniscrews?. Eur J Orthod 2015; 37: 462-466
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 28 O’Brien K, Wright J, Conboy F. 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: 128-137
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 29 Wiechmann D, Schwestka-Polly R, Hohoff A. Herbst appliance in lingual orthodontics. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2008; 134: 439-446
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 30 Wiechmann D, Schwestka-Polly R, Pancherz H. et al. Control of mandibular incisors with the combined Herbst and completely customized lingual appliance – a pilot study. Head Face Med 2010; 6: 3
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 31 Vu J, Pancherz H, Schwestka-Polly R. et al. Correction of Class II, Division 2 malocclusions using a completely customized lingual appliance and the Herbst device. J Orofac Orthop 2012; 73: 225-235
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 32 Samandara A, Papageorgiou SN, Ioannidou-Marathiotou I. et al. Evaluation of orthodontically induced external root resorption following orthodontic treatment using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT): A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Orthod 2019; 41: 67-79
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 33 Sundararaj D, Venkatachalapathy S, Tandon A. et al. Critical evaluation of incidence and prevalence of white spot lesions during fixed orthodontic appliance treatment: A meta-analysis. J Int Soc Prev Community Dent 2015; 5: 433
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 34 Lossdörfer S, Bieber C, Schwestka-Polly R. et al. Analysis of the torque capacity of a completely customized lingual appliance of the next generation. Head Face Med 2014; 10: 4
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 35 Alouini O, Knösel M, Blanck-Lubarsch M. et al. Controlling incisor torque with completely customized lingual appliances. J Orofac Orthop 2020; 81: 328-339
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 36 Koretsi V, Zymperdikas VF, Papageorgiou SN. et al. Treatment effects of removable functional appliances in patients with Class II malocclusion: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Orthod 2015; 37: 418-434
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 37 AlQatami FM, Alouini O, Knösel M. et al. Objective treatment outcome assessment of a completely customized lingual appliance: A retrospective study. Int Orthod 2021; 19: 445-452
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 38 Mujagic M, Pandis N, Fleming PS. et al. The Herbst appliance combined with a completely customized lingual appliance: A retrospective cohort study of clinical outcomes using the American Board of Orthodontics Objective Grading System. Int Orthod 2020; 18: 732-738
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 39 Pauls A, Nienkemper M, Schwestka-Polly R. et al. Therapeutic accuracy of the completely customized lingual appliance WIN: A retrospective cohort study. J Orofac Orthop 2017; 78: 52-61
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 40 van der Veen MH, Attin R, Schwestka-Polly R. et al. Caries outcomes after orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances: Do lingual brackets make a difference?. Eur J Oral Sci 2010; 118: 298-303
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 41 Wiechmann D, Klang E, Helms HJ. et al. Lingual appliances reduce the incidence of white spot lesions during orthodontic multibracket treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2015; 148: 414-422
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 42 Knösel M, Klang E, Helms HJ. et al. Occurrence and severity of enamel decalcification adjacent to bracket bases and sub-bracket lesions during orthodontic treatment with two different lingual appliances. Eur J Orthod 2016; 38: 485-492
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 43 Wiechmann D, Vu J, Schwestka-Polly R. et al. Clinical complications during treatment with a modified Herbst appliance in combination with a lingual appliance. Head Face Med 2015; 11
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 44 Gera A, Gera S, Cattaneo PM. et al. Does quality of orthodontic treatment outcome influence post-treatment stability? A retrospective study investigating short-term stability 2 years after orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances and in the presence of fixed retainers. Orthod Craniofac Res 2022; 25: 368-376
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 45 Santamaría-Villegas A, Manrique-Hernandez R, Alvarez-Varela E. et al. 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
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 46 Janson G, Sathler R, Fernandes TMF. et al. Correction of Class II malocclusion with Class II elastics: A systematic review. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2013; 143: 383-392
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 47 Graf S, Vasudavan S, Wilmes B. CAD-CAM design and 3-dimensional printing of mini-implant retained orthodontic appliances. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2018; 154: 877-882
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 48 Beyling F, Klang E, Niehoff E. et al. Class II correction by maxillary en masse distalization using a completely customized lingual appliance and a novel mini-screw anchorage concept – preliminary results. Head Face Med 2021; 17: 1-10
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 49 Janssens Y, Foley PF, Beyling F. et al. Quality of occlusal outcome in adult class II patients after maxillary total arch distalization with interradicular mini-screws. Head Face Med 2024; 20: 27
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar