This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Joshi N, Hamdan AM, Fakhouri WD. Skeletal malocclusion: a developmental disorder with a life-long morbidity. J Clin Med Res 2014;6:399-408.JoshiNHamdanAMFakhouriWD. Skeletal malocclusion: a developmental disorder with a life-long morbidity.J Clin Med Res2014;6:399-408.10.14740/jocmr1905wSearch in Google Scholar
El Hajj N, Bassil-Nassif N, Tauk A, Mouhanna-Fattal C, Bouserhal JP. Maxillary and mandibular contribution to the establishment of class II malocclusion in an adult Lebanese population. Int Orthod 2017;15:677-97.El HajjNBassil-NassifNTaukAMouhanna-FattalCBouserhalJP. Maxillary and mandibular contribution to the establishment of class II malocclusion in an adult Lebanese population.Int Orthod2017;15:677-97.10.1016/j.ortho.2017.09.025Search in Google Scholar
McNamara JA, Jr. Components of class II malocclusion in children 8-10 years of age. Angle Orthod 1981;51:177-202.McNamaraJAJr. Components of class II malocclusion in children 8-10 years of age.Angle Orthod1981;51:177-202.Search in Google Scholar
Ghislanzoni LT, Baccetti T, Toll D, Defraia E, McNamara JA Jr., Franchi L. Treatment timing of MARA and fixed appliance therapy of Class II malocclusion. Eur J Orthod 2013;35:394-400.GhislanzoniLTBaccettiTTollDDefraiaEMcNamaraJAJr.FranchiL. Treatment timing of MARA and fixed appliance therapy of Class II malocclusion.Eur J Orthod2013;35:394-400.10.1093/ejo/cjs023Search in Google Scholar
Pancherz H. Treatment of class II malocclusions by jumping the bite with the Herbst appliance. A cephalometric investigation. Am J Orthod 1979;76:423-42.PancherzH. Treatment of class II malocclusions by jumping the bite with the Herbst appliance. A cephalometric investigation.Am J Orthod1979;76:423-42.10.1016/0002-9416(79)90227-6Search in Google Scholar
Pancherz H, Malmgren O, Hägg U, Omblus J, Hansen K. Class II correction in Herbst and Bass therapy. Eur J Orthod 1989;11:17-30.PancherzHMalmgrenOHäggUOmblusJHansenK. Class II correction in Herbst and Bass therapy.Eur J Orthod1989;11:17-30.10.1093/oxfordjournals.ejo.a035960Search in Google Scholar
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;124:128-37.O’BrienKWrightJConboyFSanjieYMandallNChadwickS. Effectiveness of treatment for Class II malocclusion with the Herbst or twin-block appliances: a randomized, controlled trial.Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop2003;124:128-37.10.1016/S0889-5406(03)00345-7Search in Google Scholar
Heinig N, Göz G. Clinical application and effects of the Forsus spring. A study of a new Herbst hybrid. J Orofac Orthop 2001;62:436-50.HeinigNGözG. Clinical application and effects of the Forsus spring. A study of a new Herbst hybrid.J Orofac Orthop2001;62:436-50.10.1007/s00056-001-0053-611765707Search in Google Scholar
Jones G, Buschang PH, Kim KB, Oliver DR. Class II non-extraction patients treated with the Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device versus intermaxillary elastics. Angle Orthod 2008;78:332-8.JonesGBuschangPHKimKBOliverDR. Class II non-extraction patients treated with the Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device versus intermaxillary elastics.Angle Orthod2008;78:332-8.10.2319/030607-115.118251605Search in Google Scholar
Arora V, Sharma R, Chowdhary S. Comparative evaluation of treatment effects between two fixed functional appliances for correction of Class II malocclusion: A single-center, randomized controlled trial. Angle Orthod 2018;88:259-66.AroraVSharmaRChowdharyS. Comparative evaluation of treatment effects between two fixed functional appliances for correction of Class II malocclusion: A single-center, randomized controlled trial.Angle Orthod2018;88:259-66.10.2319/071717-476.1828831329517274Search in Google Scholar
Adusumilli SP, Sudhakar P, Mummidi B, Varma DP, Arora S, Radhika A et al. Biomechanical and clinical considerations in correcting skeletal class II malocclusion with Forsus™. J Contemp Dent Pract 2012;13:918-24.AdusumilliSPSudhakarPMummidiBVarmaDPAroraSRadhikaA. Biomechanical and clinical considerations in correcting skeletal class II malocclusion with Forsus™J Contemp Dent Pract2012;13:918-24.10.5005/jp-journals-10024-125423404028Search in Google Scholar
Linjawi AI, Abbassy MA. Dentoskeletal effects of the forsus™ fatigue resistance device in the treatment of class II malocclusion: A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Orthod Sci 2018;7:5.LinjawiAIAbbassyMA. Dentoskeletal effects of the forsus™ fatigue resistance device in the treatment of class II malocclusion: A systematic review and meta-analysis.J Orthod Sci2018;7:5.10.4103/jos.JOS_80_17595223529765917Search in Google Scholar
Cacciatore G, Alvetro L, Defraia E, Ghislanzoni LT, Franchi L. Active-treatment effects of the Forsus fatigue resistant device during comprehensive Class II correction in growing patients. Korean J Orthod 2014;44:136-42.CacciatoreGAlvetroLDefraiaEGhislanzoniLTFranchiL. Active-treatment effects of the Forsus fatigue resistant device during comprehensive Class II correction in growing patients.Korean J Orthod2014;44:136-42.10.4041/kjod.2014.44.3.136404036124892027Search in Google Scholar
Franchi L, Alvetro L, Giuntini V, Masucci C, Defraia E, Baccetti T. Effectiveness of comprehensive fixed appliance treatment used with the Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device in Class II patients. Angle Orthod 2011;81:678-83.FranchiLAlvetroLGiuntiniVMasucciCDefraiaEBaccettiT. Effectiveness of comprehensive fixed appliance treatment used with the Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device in Class II patients.Angle Orthod2011;81:678-83.10.2319/102710-629.1891973921299410Search in Google Scholar
Giuntini V, Vangelisti A, Masucci C, Defraia E, McNamara JA Jr., Franchi L. Treatment effects produced by the Twin-block appliance vs the Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device in growing Class II patients. Angle Orthod 2015;85:784-9.GiuntiniVVangelistiAMasucciCDefraiaEMcNamaraJAJr.FranchiL. Treatment effects produced by the Twin-block appliance vs the Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device in growing Class II patients.Angle Orthod2015;85:784-9.10.2319/090514-624.1861040325786056Search in Google Scholar
Unal T, Celikoglu M, Candirli C. Evaluation of the effects of skeletal anchoraged Forsus FRD using miniplates inserted on mandibular symphysis: A new approach for the treatment of Class II malocclusion. Angle Orthod 2015;85:413-9.UnalTCelikogluMCandirliC. Evaluation of the effects of skeletal anchoraged Forsus FRD using miniplates inserted on mandibular symphysis: A new approach for the treatment of Class II malocclusion.Angle Orthod2015;85:413-9.10.2319/051314-345.1861242825279724Search in Google Scholar
Celikoglu M, Buyuk SK, Ekizer A, Unal T. Treatment effects of skeletally anchored Forsus FRD EZ and Herbst appliances: A retrospective clinical study. Angle Orthod 2016;86:306-14.CelikogluMBuyukSKEkizerAUnalT. Treatment effects of skeletally anchored Forsus FRD EZ and Herbst appliances: A retrospective clinical study.Angle Orthod2016;86:306-14.10.2319/040315-225.1860361426258899Search in Google Scholar
Patil HA, Kerudi VV, Rudagi BM, Sharan JS, Tekale PD. Severe skeletal Class II Division 1 malocclusion in postpubertal girl treated using Forsus with miniplate anchorage. J Orthod Sci 2017;6:147-51.PatilHAKerudiVVRudagiBMSharanJSTekalePD. Severe skeletal Class II Division 1 malocclusion in postpubertal girl treated using Forsus with miniplate anchorage.J Orthod Sci2017;6:147-51.10.4103/jos.JOS_59_17565596529119096Search in Google Scholar
Cumpston M, Li T, Page MJ, Chandler J, Welch VA, Higgins JP et al. Updated guidance for trusted systematic reviews: a new edition of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2019;10:Ed000142.CumpstonMLiTPageMJChandlerJWelchVAHigginsJP. Updated guidance for trusted systematic reviews: a new edition of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions.Cochrane Database Syst Rev2019;10:Ed000142.10.1002/14651858.ED00014231643080Search in Google Scholar
Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. BMJ (Clinical research ed) 2009;339:b2535.MoherDLiberatiATetzlaffJAltmanDGPRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. BMJ (Clinical research ed)2009;339:b2535.10.1136/bmj.b2535271465719622551Search in Google Scholar
Stang A. Critical evaluation of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for the assessment of the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses. Eur J Epidemiol 2010;25:603-5.StangA. Critical evaluation of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for the assessment of the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses.Eur J Epidemiol2010;25:603-5.10.1007/s10654-010-9491-z20652370Search in Google Scholar
Balshem H, Helfand M, Schünemann HJ, Oxman AD, Kunz R, Brozek J et al. GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence. J Clin Epidemiol 2011;64:401-6.BalshemHHelfandMSchünemannHJOxmanADKunzRBrozekJ. GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence.J Clin Epidemiol2011;64:401-6.10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.07.01521208779Search in Google Scholar
Aslan BI, Kucukkaraca E, Turkoz C, Dincer M. Treatment effects of the Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device used with miniscrew anchorage. Angle Orthod 2014;84:76-87.AslanBIKucukkaracaETurkozCDincerM. Treatment effects of the Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device used with miniscrew anchorage.Angle Orthod2014;84:76-87.10.2319/032613-240.1868305723772682Search in Google Scholar
Eissa O, Ei-Shennawy M, Gaballah S, El-Meehy G, El Bialy T. Treatment outcomes of Class II malocclusion cases treated with miniscrew-anchored Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device: A randomized controlled trial. Angle Orthod 2017;87:824-33.EissaOEi-ShennawyMGaballahSEl-MeehyGEl BialyT. Treatment outcomes of Class II malocclusion cases treated with miniscrew-anchored Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device: A randomized controlled trial.Angle Orthod2017;87:824-33.10.2319/032717-214.1831757328885034Search in Google Scholar
Elkordy SA, Abouelezz AM, Fayed MM, Attia KH, Ishaq RA, Mostafa YA. Three-dimensional effects of the mini-implant-anchored Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device: A randomized controlled trial. Angle Orthod 2016;86:292-305.ElkordySAAbouelezzAMFayedMMAttiaKHIshaqRAMostafaYA. Three-dimensional effects of the mini-implant-anchored Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device: A randomized controlled trial.Angle Orthod2016;86:292-305.10.2319/012515-55.1860361325989213Search in Google Scholar
Elkordy SA, Abouelezz AM, Fayed MM, Aboulfotouh MH, Mostafa YA. Evaluation of the miniplate-anchored Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device in skeletal Class II growing subjects: A randomized controlled trial. Angle Orthod 2019;89:391-403.ElkordySAAbouelezzAMFayedMMAboulfotouhMHMostafaYA. Evaluation of the miniplate-anchored Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device in skeletal Class II growing subjects: A randomized controlled trial.Angle Orthod2019;89:391-403.10.2319/062018-468.1811768430644762Search in Google Scholar
Turkkahraman H, Eliacik SK, Findik Y. Effects of miniplate anchored and conventional Forsus Fatigue Resistant Devices in the treatment of Class II malocclusion. Angle Orthod 2016;86:1026-32.TurkkahramanHEliacikSKFindikY. Effects of miniplate anchored and conventional Forsus Fatigue Resistant Devices in the treatment of Class II malocclusion.Angle Orthod2016;86:1026-32.10.2319/122515-887.1859734927018848Search in Google Scholar
Gandedkar NH, Shrikantaiah S, Patil AK, Baseer MA, Chng CK, Ganeshkar SV et al. Influence of conventional and skeletal anchorage system supported fixed functional appliance on maxillo-mandibular complex and temporomandibular joint: A preliminary comparative cone beam computed tomography study. Int Orthod 2019;17:256-68.GandedkarNHShrikantaiahSPatilAKBaseerMAChngCKGaneshkarSV. Influence of conventional and skeletal anchorage system supported fixed functional appliance on maxillo-mandibular complex and temporomandibular joint: A preliminary comparative cone beam computed tomography study.Int Orthod2019;17:256-68.10.1016/j.ortho.2019.03.00831023589Search in Google Scholar
El-Sheikh MM, Godfrey K, Manosudprasit M, Viwattanatipa N. Force-deflection characteristics of the fatigue-resistant device spring: an in vitro study. World J Orthod 2007;8:30-6.El-SheikhMMGodfreyKManosudprasitMViwattanatipaN. Force-deflection characteristics of the fatigue-resistant device spring: an in vitro study.World J Orthod2007;8:30-6.Search in Google Scholar
Phan KL, Bendeus M, Hägg U, Hansen K, Rabie AB. Comparison of the headgear activator and Herbst appliance--effects and post-treatment changes. Eur J Orthod 2006;28:594-604.PhanKLBendeusMHäggUHansenKRabieAB. Comparison of the headgear activator and Herbst appliance--effects and post-treatment changes.Eur J Orthod2006;28:594-604.10.1093/ejo/cjl05217142260Search in Google Scholar
Kinzinger G, Gülden N, Yildizhan F, Hermanns-Sachweh B, Diedrich P. Anchorage efficacy of palatally-inserted miniscrews in molar distalization with a periodontally/miniscrew-anchored distal jet. J Orofac Orthop 2008;69:110-20.KinzingerGGüldenNYildizhanFHermanns-SachwehBDiedrichP. Anchorage efficacy of palatally-inserted miniscrews in molar distalization with a periodontally/miniscrew-anchored distal jet.J Orofac Orthop2008;69:110-20.10.1007/s00056-008-0736-318385957Search in Google Scholar
El-Beialy AR, Abou-El-Ezz AM, Attia KH, El-Bialy AM, Mostafa YA. Loss of anchorage of miniscrews: a 3-dimensional assessment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2009;136:700-7.El-BeialyARAbou-El-EzzAMAttiaKHEl-BialyAMMostafaYA. Loss of anchorage of miniscrews: a 3-dimensional assessment.Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop2009;136:700-7.10.1016/j.ajodo.2007.10.05919892288Search in Google Scholar
Liou EJ, Pai BC, Lin JC. Do miniscrews remain stationary under orthodontic forces? Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2004;126:42-7.LiouEJPaiBCLinJC. Do miniscrews remain stationary under orthodontic forces?Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop2004;126:42-7.10.1016/j.ajodo.2003.06.018Search in Google Scholar
Kim S, Herring S, Wang IC, Alcalde R, Mak V, Fu I et al. A comparison of miniplates and teeth for orthodontic anchorage. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2008;133:189.e1-9.KimSHerringSWangICAlcaldeRMakVFuI. A comparison of miniplates and teeth for orthodontic anchorage.Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop2008;133:189.e1-9.10.1016/j.ajodo.2007.07.016Search in Google Scholar
Aras A, Ada E, Saracoğlu H, Gezer NS, Aras I. Comparison of treatments with the Forsus fatigue resistant device in relation to skeletal maturity: a cephalometric and magnetic resonance imaging study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2011;140:616-25.ArasAAdaESaracoğluHGezerNSArasI. Comparison of treatments with the Forsus fatigue resistant device in relation to skeletal maturity: a cephalometric and magnetic resonance imaging study.Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop2011;140:616-25.10.1016/j.ajodo.2010.12.018Search in Google Scholar
Oztoprak MO, Nalbantgil D, Uyanlar A, Arun T. A cephalometric comparative study of class II correction with Sabbagh Universal Spring (SUS(2)) and Forsus FRD appliances. Eur J Dent 2012;6:302-10.OztoprakMONalbantgilDUyanlarAArunT. A cephalometric comparative study of class II correction with Sabbagh Universal Spring (SUS(2)) and Forsus FRD appliances.Eur J Dent2012;6:302-10.10.1055/s-0039-1698965Search in Google Scholar
Hayashida H, Ioi H, Nakata S, Takahashi I, Counts AL. Effects of retraction of anterior teeth and initial soft tissue variables on lip changes in Japanese adults. Eur J Orthod 2011;33:419-26.HayashidaHIoiHNakataSTakahashiICountsAL. Effects of retraction of anterior teeth and initial soft tissue variables on lip changes in Japanese adults.Eur J Orthod2011;33:419-26.10.1093/ejo/cjq095Search in Google Scholar
Bourzgui F, Alami S, Sebbar M, Derkaoui T, Hamza M, Serhier Z et al. Effect of orthodontic treatment on lip position. Int Orthod 2013;11:303-13.BourzguiFAlamiSSebbarMDerkaouiTHamzaMSerhierZ. Effect of orthodontic treatment on lip position.Int Orthod2013;11:303-13.10.1016/j.ortho.2013.05.001Search in Google Scholar
Kasai K. Soft tissue adaptability to hard tissues in facial profiles. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1998;113:674-84.KasaiK. Soft tissue adaptability to hard tissues in facial profiles.Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop1998;113:674-84.10.1016/S0889-5406(98)70228-8Search in Google Scholar
Marzouk ES, Kassem HE. Long-term stability of soft tissue changes in anterior open bite adults treated with zygomatic miniplate-anchored maxillary posterior intrusion. Angle Orthod 2018;88:163-70.MarzoukESKassemHE. Long-term stability of soft tissue changes in anterior open bite adults treated with zygomatic miniplate-anchored maxillary posterior intrusion.Angle Orthod2018;88:163-70.10.2319/072317-490.1831252829140721Search in Google Scholar
Solem RC, Marasco R, Guiterrez-Pulido L, Nielsen I, Kim SH, Nelson G. Three-dimensional soft-tissue and hard-tissue changes in the treatment of bimaxillary protrusion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2013;144:218-28.SolemRCMarascoRGuiterrez-PulidoLNielsenIKimSHNelsonG. Three-dimensional soft-tissue and hard-tissue changes in the treatment of bimaxillary protrusion.Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop2013;144:218-28.10.1016/j.ajodo.2013.03.01823910203Search in Google Scholar
Alkadhi RM, Finkelman MD, Trotman CA, Kanavakis G. The role of lip thickness in upper lip response to sagittal change of incisor position. Orthod Craniofac Res 2019;22:53-7.AlkadhiRMFinkelmanMDTrotmanCAKanavakisG. The role of lip thickness in upper lip response to sagittal change of incisor position.Orthod Craniofac Res2019;22:53-7.10.1111/ocr.1225730549432Search in Google Scholar
Elkordy SA, Aboelnaga AA, Fayed MM, AboulFotouh MH, Abouelezz AM. Can the use of skeletal anchors in conjunction with fixed functional appliances promote skeletal changes? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Orthod 2016;38:532-45.ElkordySAAboelnagaAAFayedMMAboulFotouhMHAbouelezzAM. Can the use of skeletal anchors in conjunction with fixed functional appliances promote skeletal changes? A systematic review and meta-analysis.Eur J Orthod2016;38:532-45.10.1093/ejo/cjv08126715339Search in Google Scholar
Elkordy SA, Fayed MM, Abouelezz AM, Attia KH. Comparison of patient acceptance of the Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device with and without mini-implant anchorage: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2015;148:755-64.ElkordySAFayedMMAbouelezzAMAttiaKH. Comparison of patient acceptance of the Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device with and without mini-implant anchorage: a randomized controlled trial.Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop2015;148:755-64.10.1016/j.ajodo.2015.06.01526522035Search in Google Scholar
Bowman AC, Saltaji H, Flores-Mir C, Preston B, Tabbaa S. Patient experiences with the Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device. Angle Orthod 2013;83:437-46.BowmanACSaltajiHFlores-MirCPrestonBTabbaaS. Patient experiences with the Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device.Angle Orthod2013;83:437-46.10.2319/081112-647.1876307923075059Search in Google Scholar
Cornelis MA, Scheffler NR, Nyssen-Behets C, De Clerck HJ, Tulloch JF. Patients’ and orthodontists’ perceptions of miniplates used for temporary skeletal anchorage: a prospective study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2008;133:18-24.CornelisMASchefflerNRNyssen-BehetsCDe ClerckHJTullochJF. Patients’ and orthodontists’ perceptions of miniplates used for temporary skeletal anchorage: a prospective study.Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop2008;133:18-24.10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.09.049270561818174066Search in Google Scholar
