Literature DB >> 12401046

Effect of varying the force direction on maxillary orthopedic protraction.

Ahmet Keles1, Ebru Cetinkaya Tokmak, Nejat Erverdi, Ravindra Nanda.   

Abstract

The aim of this study was to examine the effect of varying the force direction on maxillary protraction. A total of 20 patients with class III maxillary retrognathism were randomly divided into two groups. Group 1 was comprised of nine patients with a mean age of 8.58 years, and group 2 was composed of 11 patients with a mean age of 8.51 years. Both groups received a cap splint-type rapid palatal expander and the screw was activated twice a day for 10 days. After the expansion procedure the face mask protraction procedure was initiated. In group 1, we applied the force intraorally from the canine region with a forward and downward direction at a 30 degrees angle to the occlusal plane. In group 2, the force was applied extraorally 20 mm above the maxillary occlusal plane. In both groups a unilateral 500 g force was applied and the patients were instructed to wear the face mask for 16 h/d for the first three months and 12 h/d for the next three months. The Wilcoxon sign rank test was used to evaluate the effect of the two different face masks, and a Mann-Whitney U-test was carried out to evaluate the differences between the two groups. The results showed that both force systems were equally effective to protract the maxilla; however, in group I we observed that the maxilla advanced forward with a counter-clockwise rotation. In group 2 we observed an anterior translation of maxilla without rotation. The dental effects of both methods were also different. The maxillary occlusal plane did not rotate in group 1, in contrast to the clockwise rotation in group 2. The maxillary incisors were proclined slightly in group 1, but in contrast they were retroclined and extruded in group 2. In conclusion, the force application from near the center of resistance of the maxilla was an effective method to prevent the unwanted side effects, such as counter-clockwise rotation of the maxilla, in group 1. The group 2 results suggest that this method can be used effectively on patients who present as class III combined with an anterior open bite.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12401046     DOI: 10.1043/0003-3219(2002)072<0387:EOVTFD>2.0.CO;2

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Angle Orthod        ISSN: 0003-3219            Impact factor:   2.079


  11 in total

Review 1.  Effectiveness of maxillary protraction using facemask with or without maxillary expansion: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Moritz Foersch; Collin Jacobs; Susanne Wriedt; Marlene Hechtner; Heinrich Wehrbein
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2015-05-19       Impact factor: 3.573

2.  3D soft tissue changes in facial morphology in patients with cleft lip and palate and class III mal occlusion under therapy with rapid maxillary expansion and delaire facemask.

Authors:  Claudia Sade Hoefert; Margit Bacher; Tina Herberts; Michael Krimmel; Siegmar Reinert; Gernot Göz
Journal:  J Orofac Orthop       Date:  2010-04-01       Impact factor: 1.938

3.  Early treatment of class III malocclusion with facemask.

Authors:  Robert S D Smyth; Fiona S Ryan
Journal:  Evid Based Dent       Date:  2017-12-22

4.  Do we pay for maxillary protraction? Evaluation of the effects of Alt-RAMEC protocol and face mask treatment on root development.

Authors:  Berza Sen Yilmaz; Elif Dilara Seker; Hanife Nuray Yilmaz; Nazan Kucukkeles
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2021-11-25       Impact factor: 3.573

5.  Do we get better outcomes from early treatment of Class III discrepancies?

Authors:  Andrew T DiBiase; Jadbinder Seehra; Spyridon N Papageorgiou; Martyn T Cobourne
Journal:  Br Dent J       Date:  2022-08-12       Impact factor: 2.727

6.  Comparison of short-term effects between face mask and skeletal anchorage therapy with intermaxillary elastics in patients with maxillary retrognathia.

Authors:  Cahide Ağlarcı; Elçin Esenlik; Yavuz Fındık
Journal:  Eur J Orthod       Date:  2015-07-27       Impact factor: 3.075

7.  Sutural deformation during bone-anchored maxillary protraction.

Authors:  Taylor Rae Vracar; Wanda Claro; Michael Eli Vracar; Randall Stetson Jenkins; Lane Bland; Ayman Al Dayeh
Journal:  J Oral Biol Craniofac Res       Date:  2021-05-21

8.  Facemask performance during maxillary protraction: a finite element analysis (FEA) evaluation of load and stress distribution on Delaire facemask.

Authors:  Francesca Gazzani; Chiara Pavoni; Aldo Giancotti; Paola Cozza; Roberta Lione
Journal:  Prog Orthod       Date:  2018-07-09       Impact factor: 2.750

9.  Comparison of skeletal anchored facemask and tooth-borne facemask according to vertical skeletal pattern and growth stage.

Authors:  Sang-Duck Koh; Dong Hwa Chung
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2013-11-25       Impact factor: 2.079

Review 10.  Bone- and dentoalveolar-anchored dentofacial orthopedics for Class III malocclusion: new approaches, similar objectives? : a systematic review.

Authors:  Marta Morales-Fernández; Alejandro Iglesias-Linares; Rosa Maria Yañez-Vico; Asuncion Mendoza-Mendoza; Enrique Solano-Reina
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2012-09-26       Impact factor: 2.079

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.