Herbst Appliance Treatment: Tips to Make Life Easier

Despite of the fact that nowadays the Herbst appliance is the most frequently used mandibular advancement device in the USA, several clinicians are reluctant to use it. Problems with its management, and doubts on its skeletal effects are the key concerns of many clinicians. Even orthodontists who have been using Herbst appliance have doubts on how to make life easier when dealing with severe Class II/1 malocclusion. In this lecture it will be shared with the audience our experience in the treatment of severe Class II/1 patients with the Herbst appliance, providing tips on how to avoid appliance breakage, soft tissue injuries, less chair time, and a more effective and efficient outcome.

Learning Objectives:

Distinguish the good responders to an effective and efficient Herbst appliance treatment among Class II malocclusion subjects.
Identify the most frequent mistakes with the use of Herbst appliance.
Recognize the possibilities and limitations of the dentoskeletal effects of the Herbst appliance treatment.

Forsus: Effective, Efficient and Versatile Class II Correction

Forsus is a reliable appliance in the treatment of various types of Class II malocclusions. It is independent of patient cooperation, quick to install and easily accepted by patients. However, its biggest advantage is the variable force system that can be created to achieve excellent clinical results. Dr. Alvetro will present various types of Class II malocclusions and how Forsus can be used to obtain successful treatment outcomes.

Learning Objectives:

Decide when Forsus would be an appropriate choice for Class II correction.
Identify an ideal force system to optimize treatment outcomes.
Predict the impact of Forsus on facial esthetics.

The Geometry of the Class II Correction

There still remains confusion over the biomechanics and anatomical limitations in correcting the Class II malocclusion. In private practice when treatment starts taking too long or unexpected side effects start showing up there is often little distinction made between patients with poor compliance versus poor diagnosis and unrealistic treatment planning. By exploring the geometry of the Class II correction, it may become more evident how improved treatment planning can minimize patients over treatment time in our practices.

Learning Objectives:

Identify when the geometry of the Class II correction is reasonable vs. unrealistic.
Recognize what treatment plans should be considered to achieve a favorable geometry.
Discuss some techniques that may minimize unwanted side effects in more difficult corrections.

Bernardo Q. Souki DDS, MSD, PhD

Appearances