Bozkurt, Aylin PasaogluAras, IsilOthman, EmanAras, Aynur2024-03-132024-03-1320200889-54061097-6752https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2019.05.013https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12662/3602Introduction: The objective of this research was to compare the 2 treatment protocols including a functional mandibular advancer (FMA; Forestadent, Pforzheim, Germany) followed by multibracket appliances (MBAs) vs a Forsus device (3M Unitek, Monrovia, Calif) in combination with MBA concerning treatment outcomes and posttreatment stability. Methods: This study was conducted using lateral cephalograms of patients who were treated with MBA, which was used either after an FMA or concurrently with a Forsus device, and of patients who had untreated Class II malocclusion (control group). Each group consisted of 19 subjects in cervical stage 2 or cervical stage 3 stages according to the cervical vertebral maturation index. Cephalograms were taken for the treated groups at T1 (pretreatment), T2 (completion of the MBA treatment), and T3 (at least 2 years after T2). Results: Significant intergroup differences at the T1-T2 period were observed in favor of the FMA concerning mandibular advancement, intermaxillary relationship, and mandibular elongation. With Forsus treatment, restrained maxillary growth and a slightly improved intermaxillary relationship rebounded after treatment (P <0.05). At the end of treatment, mandibular incisor protrusion and occlusal plane rotation were greater in the Forsus group than in the FMA group (P <0.05), and maxillary incisor retroclination was significant in the Forsus group. During the posttreatment period, although no significant changes were present in the incisors' inclination, relapses of the T1-T2 improvements in overjet and overbite and the recidive of the occlusal plane rotation were significantly higher in the Forsus group. Conclusions: Treatment protocol including an FMA was found to be more effective with mandibular skeletal effects and was more stable with a lesser degree of relapse in overjet and overbite than the Forsus protocol.eninfo:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccessArticle10.1016/j.ajodo.2019.05.0132-s2.0-85082589357480432241354Q1474157WOS:000522631500013Q2