Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 26, 2026

Measuring Maxillary Posterior Tooth Movement: A Model Assessment using Palatal and Dental Superimposition
Published on: February 23, 2024
A comparison of the MARA and the AdvanSync functional appliances in the treatment of Class II malocclusion
Thikriat S Al-Jewair1, Charles B Preston, Eva-Maria Moll
1Department of Orthodontics, School of Dental Medicine, State University of New York at Buffalo, Buffalo, NY, USA. taljewair@gmail.com
Objectives:
To determine the skeletal and dentoalveolar effects produced by the MARA and the AdvanSync functional appliances in the treatment of growing patients with Class II malocclusion.
Materials And Methods:
A retrospective study was conducted using lateral cephalograms of patients consecutively treated with MARA (n = 40) and AdvanSync (n = 30) during their skeletal growth spurt as evaluated by the improved cervical vertebral maturation method. A comparison was made with 24 untreated Class II control subjects obtained from the University of Michigan growth study and matched with the experimental groups for skeletal age, sex, and craniofacial morphology. Cephalograms were taken at three time points: (T1) pretreatment, (T2) postfunctional appliance treatment, and (T3) fixed orthodontic treatment completion. Treatment changes were evaluated between the time points using 35 variables. Data were analyzed using one-way analysis of variance and Scheffe's post hoc test.
Results:
At the postfunctional appliances' phase (T2-T1), both appliances showed significant increases in total mandibular length, ramus height, and anterior/posterior facial height. The AdvanSync resulted in significant restriction of maxillary growth, 1° more than MARA. This effect continued during the fixed orthodontic treatment stage (T3-T2). The net changes (T3-T1) revealed significant mandibular growth enhancement with MARA (+2.7mm) and significant headgear effect with AdvanSync. Both appliances caused 5° flaring in mandibular incisors as well as significant decreases in overjet and overbite. The treatment time for AdvanSync was 1 year less than MARA.
Conclusion:
The MARA and the AdvanSync resulted in normalization of the Class II malocclusion. The AdvanSync showed more headgear effect but less mandibular length enhancement than MARA did. Both appliances showed similar dentoalveolar changes.
Related Concept Videos
Tooth Anatomy
The Crown, Neck, and Root
The visible part of the tooth is referred to as the crown. It's covered by enamel, the hardest substance in the human body. The crown is uniquely shaped for each type of tooth, allowing for different functions such as cutting, tearing, or grinding food.
Assessment of the Mouth
Mouth Inspection
The inspection begins with visually examining the mouth for symmetry, color, and size.

