Twenty class II malocclusion patients with age (11-16) years will be randomly allocated in the two groups:~Group I: Patients will be treated by Carriere Motion Appliance using passive lingual arch.~Group II: Patients will be treated by Carriere Motion Appliance using direct mini-screw.~For each patient, two CBCT will be obtained: one preoperatively and another after completion of distalization.~Comparing skeletal and dental measurements obtained from CBCT radiographs obtained prior to treatment (T0) and immediately after correction of class II and remval of the appliance (T1).
Carriere Motion appliance (CMA) was designed to correct a Class II molar relationship into a Class I relationship by distalizing the whole posterior maxillary segment by means of class II elastics and mandibular anchorage. To revoke the adverse effects of CMA with class II elastics, we can use the CMA to distalize the maxillary posterior segment with TADs anchorage using miniscrews. The aim of this study is to evaluate TADs anchored CMA vs. conventionally anchored CMA for distalization of the maxillary buccal segment.