Objectives:

To evaluate the treatment outcomes between Twin Block and AdvanSync2^® appliances by comparing the skeletal, dentoalveolar, and soft tissue changes.

Materials and Methods:

Radiographic data of 20 patients were retrospectively analyzed. Data were selected from patients in their skeletal growth spurt as evaluated by the cervical vertebral maturation method (CVMI 2, 3, and 4), with class II malocclusion characterized with retrognathic mandible (ANB > 4°, SNB < 77°, FMA = 25 ± 5°, overjet > 5 mm). There were 10 patients in each group that underwent orthodontic correction for class II malocclusion: either using Twin Block or AdvanSync2^®. Independent t test and Paired t test and chi-square tests were used for the data analysis. The level of statistical significance was set at P value ≤.05.

Results:

The chronological and skeletal age were similar in both the groups. Records were taken for the functional treatment with mean treatment span of 8 ± 1 month. Changes in SNB (group I = 1.59°, group II = 3.11°) (P < .01), Co-Gn (group I = 2.89 mm, group II = 5.34 mm), and U1-L1° (group I = −1.51°, group II = 2.97°) showed statistically different outcome between the groups, when the pre-post data were studied. Rest of the variables—cranial base, maxillary skeletal, mandibular skeletal, intermaxillary, vertical skeletal, maxillary dentoalveolar, mandibular dentoalveolar, and soft tissue—showed similar outcome (P > .05).

Conclusion:

Both appliances lead to desirable outcomes in the correction of class II malocclusion. AdvanSync2^® resulted in inducing more of changes in SNB and effective mandibular length as compared to Twin Block. Overjet and molar relation improved significantly with both the appliances. Both the appliances resulted in similar skeletal, dentoalveolar, and soft tissue changes.