currycelincurryland
Bronze
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2019
- Posts
- 402
- Reputation
- 503
If I were you I would be more worried of your wimp skull.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: this_feature_currently_requires_accessing_site_using_safari
what's their fucking job then ?
Putting teeth together while it doesn't add that much to PSL ?
It's a year later, do you still stand on those same pointsI think there was a thread on mse pulling not being ideal due to the anchor point it attaches being too far back and not able to rotate the maxilla in the way you want due to the forces rotating the posterior section too much while the anterior part is the section you want to come up and forward for more compact midface and undereye support etc, I would start as soon as you can
you can’t really be for sure about how the maxilla will respond to mse without a million physics equations, but this is what I mean by applying forces to the wrong area, if it’s too far back (the MSE anchor point) it will actually CW rotate the maxilla which would increase midface length, opposed to something like copes oral appliance where the majority of the upwards pressure is applied to the frontal palate
View attachment 279197
while it may not rotate it downwards, mse will 100% provide less efficient upswing than something placed at the anterior part of the palate, then again its bone anchored so you will probably see faster results, but in the end of it there are 0 ways to confirm which one is better for upswing, which is what your after with midface decreasing
MSE= less efficient upswing position force, likely faster to get changes
Copes appliance = more efficient location of force for upswing, likely slower changes