In order to improve fit and comfort, a maxillary protraction facemask customized to the patient’s anatomy was produced by means of 3D face scanning, digital design and additive manufacturing. An 8-year-old patient in need of early treatment for the Class III malocclusion received a rapid palatal expander and a Petit-type facemask, whose components were digitally designed on a 3D scan of the patient’s face. For face scanning, the iPad Pro 2018 tablet (Apple, Cupertino, CA, USA) with the Bellus3D DentalPro application (Bellus3D, Campbell, CA, USA) was used. Facemask components were modelled with 3D Blender software. The rests were 3D printed in BioMed Clear biocompatible resin (Formlabs, Somerville, MA, USA), and the bar in stainless steel. For greater comfort, the internal surface of the rests was lined with a polymer gel pad (Silipos, Niagara Falls, NY, USA). The manufacturing procedure of the customized facemask is patented. The patient wore the facemask at night for a period of 9 months. The patient’s experience was evaluated with a questionnaire at 1 week, 3, 6, and 10 months of treatment. The customized facemask was well accepted by the patient and obtained the expected treatment outcome. Furthermore, 3D face scanning, 3D modelling and 3D printing allow for the manufacturing of customized facemasks with improved fit and comfort, favoring patient compliance and treatment success.

Objective: The objective of this prospective controlled study was to assess the outcomes of two-phase treatment of deepbite patients revaluated at the end of circumpubertal growth, 1 year after the end of a phase-2 treatment. Materials and Methods: A sample of 58 subjects with deepbite (mean age 9.7 years, overbite greater than 4.5 mm) was treated consecutively with a two-phase protocol. Lateral cephalograms were taken before treatment (T1), at the completion of phase 1 (T2), and 1 year after the completion of phase 2 with fixed appliances (T3, mean age 15.8 years). The T1-T2, T2-T3, and T1-T3 changes were compared with those of the 29 subjects (mean age at T1 = 9.1 years) with untreated deepbite (t-tests for independent samples). Prevalence rates for improved overbite during the T1-T3 interval and for corrected overbite at T3 were contrasted in the treated vs untreated groups (z tests on proportions). Results: Overbite was reduced by 1.9 mm in the treated group as a result of overall treatment; this group also displayed a significant reduction in the interincisal angulation (−6.6°) due to a significant proclination of upper incisors (4.1°) and a significant increase in the projection of the lower incisors (2.0 mm). Conclusions: The average amount of deepbite correction 1 year into retention was modest, and it was mainly due to a significant proclination of the incisors. The prevalence rate of subjects with a corrected overbite in the treated sample at T3 (74%) was not significantly different from that of the untreated sample (52%).

Background: The aim of this single-use, four-treatment, four-period (visit), cross-over, mono-centered, examiner-blind, cross-over randomized controlled trial (RCT) was to evaluate the efficacy in dental plaque removal of a U-shaped automatic electric toothbrush (U) compared to a conventional powered toothbrush (P), a habitual toothbrushing procedure (H), and no brushing (N). Methods: Eligible participants were volunteer students. Primary outcome measure was the reduction in full-mouth plaque score (FMPS) after brushing. The secondary outcome variable was a visual analogic scale (VAS) on subjective clean mouth sensation. Mixed models were performed for difference in FMPS and VAS. Results: Twenty-two participants were randomized to the treatments in the four periods of the study. The differences between treatments in FMPS reduction after brushing were statistically significant (p < 0.0001). The differences were statistically significant between the U and P groups (difference −48; 95% CI from −54 to −41) favoring the P group, and between the U and H groups (difference −45; 95% CI from −52 to −39) favoring the H group. On the contrary, the difference between the U and N groups was not significant (difference 5; 95% CI from −2 to 12) favoring the U group. The differences between treatments in clean mouth VAS was statistically significant (p < 0.0001) favoring the P and H groups. Conclusions: The U-shaped automatic electric toothbrush tested in this study proved to be not effective in removing dental plaque.

(1) Background: The nature of the changes that contribute to Class II correction with functional appliances is still controversial. A broad variation in treatment responses has been reported. The purpose of this study was to find cephalometric predictors for individual patient responsiveness to twin-block treatment in patients with Class II Division 1 malocclusion; (2) Methods: The study was performed on a sample of 39 pubertal patients (21 females, 18 males) treated with the twin block appliance. Lateral cephalograms were available at the start of the treatment (T1) and at the end of functional therapy (T2). The outcome variable was the T2–T1 change in the sagittal position of the soft tissue pogonion with respect to the vertical line perpendicular to the Frankfort plane and passing through point subnasale. The predictive variables were age, gender at T1, and all the cephalometric parameters measured T1. Forward stepwise linear regression with p value to enter 0.05 and p value to leave 0.10 was applied; (3) Results: The only significant predictive variable that was selected was the Co–Go–Me angle (p = 0.000); (4) Conclusions: A greater advancement of the soft tissue chin on the profile is expected with smaller pretreatment values of Co–Go–Me angle.

Background: to determine the role of treatment timing in the long-term effects produced by rapid maxillary expansion and facemask therapy (RME/FM) in Class III patients. Methods: This study compared two sample groups treated with RME/FM followed by fixed appliances: the early prepubertal group (EPG) (17 patients; mean age before treatment (T0), 5.8 ± 0.7 years; range, 4.3–6.9 years) and the late prepubertal group (LPG) (17 patients; mean age at T0, 10.1 ± 0.8 years; range, 9.0–11.1 years). Lateral cephalograms for the two groups were examined before treatment (T0) and at a long-term observation (T1) (EPG, 19.8 ± 1.0 years; LPG, 21.0 ± 2.1 years). Independent sample t-tests were performed to compare the two groups at T0 and T1. Results: No statistically significant differences were found for any of the cephalometric variables at T0, except for the total mandibular length, overjet, and inclination of the maxillary incisors to the palatal plane, which were greater in the LPG. At T1, no statistically significant differences were detected for any of the cephalometric variables. Conclusions: There were no significant long-term differences when treating Class III patients with RME/FM, either during an early prepubertal phase (≤7 years of age) or during a late prepubertal phase (≥9 years of age).