The main goal of treatment for skeletal Class II in growing patients is to obtain "lengthening" of the mandible.1 Skeletal Class II malocclusion can result from either maxillary protrusion, mandibular retrusion
, or a combination of the two.2 Treatment plan of these patients should be directed towards to solve the dentoskeletal disharmony in order to obtain favorable facial aesthetics.3
reported that mandibular retrusion
is the most common characteristic of this anomaly (1).
CBCT evaluation of the upper airway morphological changes in growing patients of class II division 1 malocclusion with mandibular retrusion
using twin block appliance: a comparative research.
Class II classification patients have obvious mandibular retrusion
and chin is obvious retrusion relatived to the nasal root.
Different treatment options to correct the mandibular retrusion
were offered to the patient: bilateral sagittal split ramus osteotomy (BSSO) associated with backward genioplasty or total subapical mandibular osteotomy (TMAO) which would keep the chin in position and eliminate the need for genioplasty.
The modified Teuscher activator is an effective appliance in the treatment of growing patient with Class II Division 1 relationship due to mandibular retrusion
Moreover, extraction is not recommended in patients with generalized spacing of teeth, deep-bite, hyperdivergent facial profile, or mandibular retrusion
because it will damage the facial profile .
Individuals were selected based on the following criteria: Class II facial pattern associated with mandibular retrusion
, Class II division 1 malocclusion, mixed dentition, absence of severe crowding in mandibular arch and transverse problems.
A 17-year-old girl presented with a chief complaint of a lack of interincisal contact, crowding of the mandibular incisors, and mandibular retrusion
. She had a severe Class II skeletal relationship with a concave profile.