Comparison of the treatment duration and effects of magnetic mandibular repositioning appliances and non-magnetic twin block in the treatment of growing patients with skeletal Class II malocclusion due to mandibular retrognathism – A systematic review

Abstract

Over the past two decades, magnets have been used in orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics and various attempts have been made to evaluate the biological implications of magnets and magnetic fields. This systematic review aims to provide a detailed comparison between magnetic mandibular repositioning appliances and non-magnetic twin blocks on mandibular growth modification. The objective was to evaluate the treatment duration and effects of magnetic mandibular repositioning appliances and non-magnetic twin block in growing children with skeletal Class II malocclusion due to mandibular retrognathism. Literature search of electronic databases and additional manual search was done till June 2021. Randomized controlled clinical trials (CCTs), non-randomized CCTs, case reports, case series, and retrospective clinical trials in which magnetic appliances and non-magnetic twin blocks were used for the correction of skeletal Class II malocclusion are included in the present review. Correction of skeletal Class II malocclusion was achieved in a shorter treatment duration with magnetic mandibular repositioning appliances. Similar dental and skeletal effects were observed with both the appliances; however, maxillary restraining effect and reduced mandibular incisor proclination was evident with magnetic mandibular repositioning appliances. Magnetic appliance is proven to be more effective in correction of skeletal Class II malocclusion with mandibular retrognathism and maxillary prognathism with proclined lower incisors. This systematic review was registered on Prospero with registration number CRD42020165297.