Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this retrospective cohort study was to compare the total duration of Class II malocclusion treatment with hybrid pendulum vs. buccal interradicular miniscrew supported distalization mechanics followed by fixed appliances. Molar distalization duration and end-of-the-treatment changes were also compared. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The sample of this retrospective cohort study consisted of clinical records, pre-treatment (T1) and post-treatment (T2) dental models, and panoramic and lateral cephalometric radiographs of 80 skeletal Class I patients with bilateral Class II molar relation. Molar distalization was achieved with a hybrid pendulum in Group P (15 males, 25 females; mean age: 15.19 ± 0.32 years) and with buccal interradicular miniscrew-supported compressed sentalloy coil springs in Group B (15 males, 25 females; initial mean age: 15.65 ± 0.32 years). Following molar distalization, all patients in both groups received comprehensive fixed orthodontic treatment. Molar distalization and total treatment durations and changes in Peer Assessment Rating scores and 14 cephalometric measurements were evaluated. RESULTS: Statistically significant molar distalization and distal tipping, mandibular incisor protrusion, and PAR reduction were achieved in both groups, with no difference between groups. There were no significant differences between groups for total treatment (24.58 ± 5.19 months in Group B and 24.81 ± 5.33 months in Group P) and molar distalization durations (7.01 ± 2.17 months in Group B and 7.03 ± 1.42 months in Group P) (p > 0.0167). CONCLUSIONS: The total length of orthodontic treatment for Class II malocclusion which involved molar distalization by miniscrew supported appliances was not affected by whether the appliance was located palatally or buccally.