Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 8, 2026

Transient Optical Clearing Using Absorbing Molecules for Ex Vivo and In Vivo Imaging
Published on: July 11, 2025
Soft tissue effects of three different Class II/1-camouflage treatment strategies
Ezgi Atik1, Bengisu Akarsu-Guven2, Ilken Kocadereli2
1Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, Hacettepe University, Sihhiye, 06100, Ankara, Turkey. ezgibaytorun@hotmail.com.
Objective:
Aim of this retrospective study was to compare soft tissue effects of Class II treatments with the forsus fatigue resistant device (FRD), the pendulum appliance, and the extraction of two maxillary premolars, all of which were combined with pre-adjusted fixed appliances.
Patients And Methods:
The sample of 54 patients with Class II malocclusions was divided in three groups: group I patients (mean age = 15.91 years) were treated with the FRD concurrently used with fixed appliances; group II patients (mean age = 16.08 years) were treated with the pendulum appliance combined with a Nance and headgear followed by fixed appliances; and group III patients (mean age = 19.04 years) were treated with the extraction of two maxillary premolars with miniscrew anchorage. Soft tissue and dentoskeletal parameters were measured on pretreatment (T1) and posttreatment (T2) lateral cephalograms. The changes from T1 to T2 were compared between the groups using Kruskal-Wallis test, and treatment differences were evaluated with the Wilcoxon test at p < 0.05.
Result:
Soft tissue measurement changes related to the upper and lower lips were significantly greater in group II than in group III (p < 0.05). Upper incisor measurement changes were significantly different between groups II and III. Lower incisor measurement changes were significantly different between groups I and III and groups II and III (p < 0.05).
Conclusions:
Pendulum and extraction treatment groups showed significant differences in relation with the upper and lower lip positional changes, which were significantly greater in the pendulum group. Treatment time with the extraction treatment was statistically shorter than with the nonextraction protocols.
More Related Videos
06:36Effects of Mechanical Methods Used in Peri-implantitis Treatment on Implant Surface Decontamination and Roughness
Published on: March 14, 2025
07:05Correlative Optical Spectroscopy and Mass Spectrometry Imaging Methodology to Visualise Drug Distribution in a Soft Tissue Section
Published on: June 20, 2025