1. bookVolume 31 (2015): Issue 1 (January 2015)
Journal Details
License
Format
Journal
eISSN
2207-7480
First Published
01 May 1967
Publication timeframe
1 time per year
Languages
English
Open Access

Effects of the Herbst appliance in growing orthodontic patients with different underlying vertical patterns

Published Online: 15 Aug 2021
Volume & Issue: Volume 31 (2015) - Issue 1 (January 2015)
Page range: 59 - 68
Received: 01 Mar 2015
Accepted: 01 Apr 2015
Journal Details
License
Format
Journal
eISSN
2207-7480
First Published
01 May 1967
Publication timeframe
1 time per year
Languages
English

1. Burkhardt DR, McNamara JA Jr, Baccetti T. Maxillary molar distalization or mandibular enhancement: a cephalometric comparison of comprehensive orthodontic treatment including the pendulum and the Herbst appliances. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2003;123:108-16.10.1067/mod.2003.7Search in Google Scholar

2. DeVincenzo JP. Changes in mandibular length before, during, and after successful orthopedic correction of Class II malocclusions, using a functional appliance. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1991;99:241-57.10.1016/0889-5406(91)70006-ISearch in Google Scholar

3. Hägg U, Du X, Rabie AB. Initial and late treatment effects of headgear-Herbst appliance with mandibular step-by-step advancement. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2002;122:477-85.10.1067/mod.2002.128218Search in Google Scholar

4. Hansen K, Pancherz H. Long-term effects of Herbst treatment in relation to normal growth development: a cephalometric study. Eur J Orthod 1992;14:285-95.10.1093/ejo/14.4.285Search in Google Scholar

5. Hansen K, Pancherz H, Hägg U. Long-term effects of the Herbst appliance in relation to the treatment growth period: a cephalometric study. Eur J Orthod 1991;13:471-81.10.1093/ejo/13.6.471Search in Google Scholar

6. Pancherz H. The Herbst appliance – its biologic effects and clinical use. Am J Orthod 1985;87:1-20.10.1016/0002-9416(85)90169-1Search in Google Scholar

7. Pancherz H, Hensen K. Occlusal changes during and after Herbst treatment: a cephalometric investigation. Eur J Orthod 1986;8:215-28.10.1093/ejo/8.4.215Search in Google Scholar

8. 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;104:319-29.10.1016/S0889-5406(05)81328-9Search in Google Scholar

9. Pancherz H, Ruf S, Kohlhas P. “Effective condylar growth” and chin position changes in Herbst treatment: a cephalometric roentgenographic long-term study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1998;114:437-46.10.1016/S0889-5406(98)70190-8Search in Google Scholar

10. Pancherz H. Vertical dentofacial changes during Herbst appliance treatment. A cephalometric investigation. Swed Dent J Suppl 1982;15:189-96.Search in Google Scholar

11. Pancherz H, Anehus-Pancherz M. The headgear effect of the Herbst appliance: a cephalometric long-term study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1993;103:510-20.10.1016/0889-5406(93)70090-BSearch in Google Scholar

12. Pancherz H, Michailidou C. Temporomandibular joint growth changes in hyperdivergent and hypodivergent Herbst subjects. A long-term roentgenographic cephalometric study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2004;126:153-61.10.1016/j.ajodo.2003.07.015Search in Google Scholar

13. Lai M. Molar distalization with the Herbst appliance. Semin Orthod 2000;6:119-28.10.1053/od.2000.5898Search in Google Scholar

14. VanLaecken R, Martin CA, Dischinger T, Razmus T, Ngan P. Treatment effects of the edgewise Herbst appliance: a cephalometric and tomographic investigation. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2006;130:582-93.10.1016/j.ajodo.2005.01.030Search in Google Scholar

15. Wieslander L. Intensive treatment of severe Class II malocclusions with a headgear-Herbst appliance in the early mixed dentition. Am J Orthod 1984;86:1-13.10.1016/0002-9416(84)90271-9Search in Google Scholar

16. Ruf S, Pancherz H. The mechanism of Class II correction during Herbst therapy in relation to the vertical jaw base relationship: a cephalometric roentgenographic study. Angle Orthod 1997;67:271-6.Search in Google Scholar

17. Hägg U. Change in mandibular growth direction by means of a Herbst appliance? A case report. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1992;102:456-63.10.1016/S0889-5406(05)81193-XSearch in Google Scholar

18. Schiavoni R, Grenga V, Macri V. Treatment of Class II high angle malocclusions with the Herbst appliance: a cephalometric investigation. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1992;102:393-409.10.1016/S0889-5406(05)81186-2Search in Google Scholar

19. Baccetti T, Franchi L, McNamara JA Jr. An improved version of the cervical vertebral maturation (CVM) method for the assessment of mandibular growth. Angle Orthod 2002;72:316-23.Search in Google Scholar

20. Nanda RS, Ghosh J. Longitudinal growth changes in the sagittal relationship of the maxilla and mandible. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1995;107:79-90.10.1016/S0889-5406(95)70159-1Search in Google Scholar

21. Sherman SL, Woods M, Nanda RS, Currier GF. The longitudinal effects of growth on the Wits appraisal. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1988;93:429-36.10.1016/0889-5406(88)90103-5Search in Google Scholar

22. Tadic N, Woods MG. Incisal and soft tissue effects of maxillary premolar extraction in Class II treatment. Angle Orthod 2007;77:808-16.10.2319/081706-33617685775Search in Google Scholar

23. Woods M. Lower incisor changes on basal bone and in relation to the lower face: combined growth and treatment effects in the late mixed-dentition. Aust Orthod J 2002;18:7-18.Search in Google Scholar

24. Woods MG. Sagittal mandibular changes with overbite correction in subjects with different mandibular growth directions: late mixed-dentition treatment effects. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2008;133:388-94.10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.03.03718331938Search in Google Scholar

25. Vincent AM, West VC. Cephalometric landmark identification error. Aust Orthod J 1987;10:98-104.Search in Google Scholar

26. Hägglund P, Segerdal S, Forsberg CM. The integrated Herbst appliance – treatment effects in a group of adolescent males with Class II malocclusions compared with growth changes in an untreated control group. Eur J Orthod 2008;30:120-7.10.1093/ejo/cjm102Search in Google Scholar

27. Pancherz H. A cephalometric analysis of skeletal and dental changes contributing to Class II correction in activator treatment. Am J Orthod 1984;85:125-34.10.1016/0002-9416(84)90004-6Search in Google Scholar

28. McNamara JA Jr, Howe RP, Dischinger TG. A comparison of the Herbst and Fränkel appliances in the treatment of Class II malocclusion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1990;98:134-44.10.1016/0889-5406(90)70007-YSearch in Google Scholar

29. Pancherz H. The nature of Class II relapse after Herbst appliance treatment: a cephalometric long-term investigation. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1991;100:220-33.10.1016/0889-5406(91)70059-6Search in Google Scholar

30. Pancherz H. The effects, limitations, and long-term dentofacial adaptations to treatment with the Herbst appliance. Semin Orthod 1997;3:232-43.10.1016/S1073-8746(97)80056-4Search in Google Scholar

31. Bishara SE, Jakobsen JR. Longitudinal changes in three normal facial types. Am J Orthod 1985;88:466-502.10.1016/S0002-9416(85)80046-4Search in Google Scholar

32. Ricketts RM. The influence of orthodontic treatment on facial growth and development. Angle Orthod 1960;30:103-33.Search in Google Scholar

33. Schudy FF. Vertical growth versus anteroposterior growth as related to function and treatment. Angle Orthod 1964;34:75-93.Search in Google Scholar

34. Tweed CH. The diagnostic facial triangle in the control of treatment objectives. Am J Orthod 1969;55:651-7.10.1016/0002-9416(69)90041-4Search in Google Scholar

35. Franchi L, Baccetti T, McNamara JA Jr. Mandibular growth as related to cervical vertebral maturation and body height. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2000;118:335-40.10.1067/mod.2000.10700910982936Search in Google Scholar

36. Gu Y, McNamara JA Jr. Mandibular growth changes and cervical vertebral maturation. A cephalometric implant study. Angle Orthod 2007;77:947-53.10.2319/071006-284.118004911Search in Google Scholar

37. Chan H, Woods MG, Stella D. Mandibular muscle morphology in children with different vertical facial patterns: A 3-dimensional computed tomography study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2008;133:10.e1-13.10.1016/j.ajodo.2007.05.01318174063Search in Google Scholar

38. Valant JR, Sinclair PM. Treatment effects of the Herbst appliance. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1989;95:138-47.10.1016/0889-5406(89)90392-2Search in Google Scholar

39. Pancherz H, Hägg U. Dentofacial orthopedics in relation to somatic maturation. An analysis of 70 consecutive cases treated with the Herbst appliance. Am J Orthod 1985;88:273-87.10.1016/0002-9416(85)90126-5Search in Google Scholar

40. Malmgren O, Omblus J, Hägg U, Pancherz H. Treatment with an orthopedic appliance system in relation to treatment intensity and growth periods. A study of initial effects. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1987;91:143-51.10.1016/0889-5406(87)90472-0Search in Google Scholar

41. Bell WH, Creekmore TD, Alexander RG. Surgical correction of the long face syndrome. Am J Orthod 1977;71:40-67.10.1016/0002-9416(77)90176-2Search in Google Scholar

42. Mojdehi M, Buschang PH, English JD, Wolford LM. Postsurgical growth changes in the mandible of adolescents with vertical maxillary excess growth pattern. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2001;119:106-16.10.1067/mod.2001.11211511174555Search in Google Scholar

43. Woods MG, Swift JQ, Markowitz NR. Clinical implications of advances in orthognathic surgery. J Clin Orthod 1989;23:420-9.Search in Google Scholar

44. Woods MG, Wiesenfeld D. A practical approach to presurgical orthodontic preparation. J Clin Orthod 1998:32:350-8.Search in Google Scholar

Recommended articles from Trend MD

Plan your remote conference with Sciendo