Literature DB >> 17208098

Long-term stability of Class III treatment: rapid palatal expansion and protraction facemask vs LeFort I maxillary advancement osteotomy.

Valmy Pangrazio-Kulbersh1, Jeffrey L Berger, Francis N Janisse, Burcu Bayirli.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this retrospective cephalometric study was 3-fold: (1) to compare the effects and long-term stability of protraction facemask treatment with untreated Class III controls, (2) to compare the long-term stability of early protraction facemask treatment with later surgical maxillary advancement with LeFort I osteotomy, and (3) to determine whether early intervention with protraction facemask is an effective treatment modality or whether surgical treatment after cessation of growth should be advocated. MATERIALS: The sample consisted of 34 consecutively treated white patients with Class III malocclusions characterized by maxillary deficiency. The protraction sample consisted of 17 children (8 boys, 9 girls). The surgical sample consisted of 17 adults (10 men, 7 women). The protraction group was also compared with a control group of white subjects with untreated Class III malocclusions. Lateral cephalograms were taken at T1 (initial records), T2 (end of functional appliance treatment or 2 weeks postsurgery), and T3 (7 years 6 months postprotraction or 1 year 5 months postsurgery). Means and standard deviations were calculated for descriptive cephalometric measurements. ANOVA was used to assess the differences between and within the protraction and surgery groups at T1, T2, and T3. The Tukey studentized range test was performed to determine the source of the difference. In addition, paired t tests were used to compare the differences between the protraction group and the matched controls as well as between the surgery group and the matched controls.
RESULTS: In the protraction group, there was continued favorable growth of the maxilla, even after the removal of the protraction facemask. From T2 to T3, the maxilla continued to move anteriorly in the protraction patients more so than in the control groups, which had decreases in the intermaxillary measurements (ANB angle and Wits appraisal) over time. The surgical group remained stable from T2 to T3 in all measurements studied.
CONCLUSIONS: The most striking findings of this study were the general similarity between the protraction and the surgical groups at T3 and the overall stability of both treatment modalities over time.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17208098     DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.04.024

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop        ISSN: 0889-5406            Impact factor:   2.650


  10 in total

1.  Comparison of early treatment outcomes rendered in three different types of malocclusions.

Authors:  Valmy Pangrazio-Kulbersh; He-Kyong Kang; Archana Dhawan; Riyad Al-Qawasmi; Rafael Rocha Pacheco
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2018-03-07       Impact factor: 2.079

2.  Stability of maxillary protraction therapy in children with Class III malocclusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Yifan Lin; Runzhi Guo; Liyu Hou; Zhen Fu; Weiran Li
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2018-02-10       Impact factor: 3.573

3.  Does the Alternate Rapid Maxillary ExpansionConstriction/Reverse Headgear Therapy Enhance Pharyngeal Airway Dimensions?

Authors:  Nivethitha Bhaskar; Shobha Sundareswaran; Latheef Vadakkeypeediakkal; Praveen Santhakumar; Sreehari Sathyanathan
Journal:  Turk J Orthod       Date:  2022-03

4.  Nonsurgical treatment of maxillary deficiency using tongue guard appliance: a case report.

Authors:  Farzaneh Ahrari; Neda Eslami
Journal:  J Dent Res Dent Clin Dent Prospects       Date:  2011-12-19

5.  Severe Angle Class III skeletal malocclusion associated to mandibular prognathism: orthodontic-surgical treatment.

Authors:  Marcelo Quiroga Souki
Journal:  Dental Press J Orthod       Date:  2016 Nov-Dec

6.  Angle Class III malocclusion with anteroposterior and vertical discrepancy in the final stage of growth.

Authors:  Marcelo B P de Arruda
Journal:  Dental Press J Orthod       Date:  2017 May-Jun

7.  Genes and Pathways Associated with Skeletal Sagittal Malocclusions: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Elizabeth Gershater; Chenshuang Li; Pin Ha; Chun-Hsi Chung; Nipul Tanna; Min Zou; Zhong Zheng
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2021-12-02       Impact factor: 5.923

8.  Sexual dimorphism in the long-term stability (10 years) of skeletal Class III treatment.

Authors:  Natalia Tejedor; Conchita Martín; José Antonio Alarcón; María Dolores Oteo-Calatayud; Juan Carlos Palma-Fernández
Journal:  Prog Orthod       Date:  2021-06-21       Impact factor: 2.750

9.  Class III correction using an inter-arch spring-loaded module.

Authors:  Robert Vanlaecken; Michael O Williams; Thomas Razmus; Erdogan Gunel; Chris Martin; Peter Ngan
Journal:  Prog Orthod       Date:  2014-05-02       Impact factor: 2.750

10.  Long-term results of surgically assisted maxillary protraction vs regular facemask.

Authors:  Sirin Nevzatoğlu; Nazan Küçükkeleş
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2014-03-21       Impact factor: 2.079

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.