Literature DB >> 23460730

Effects of maxillary protraction for early correction of class III malocclusion.

Mevlut Celikoglu1, Hüsamettin Oktay.   

Abstract

This prospective study investigated the skeletal, dental, and soft-tissue effects of a mini maxillary protractor appliance in class III subjects with maxillary retrusion and mandibular protrusion and compared these changes with those of untreated, well matched control sample with normal occlusions. Twenty patients with class III malocclusion (mean age 11.1 ± 0.8 years) and 20 subjects with normal occlusion (mean age 10.9 ± 0.4 years) were included to this study. The class III subjects were treated with the mini maxillary protractor appliance, and the others were used as control subjects. Paired t-test and Student's t-test were used to determine the within- and between-group differences, respectively. In the study group, the maxilla moved forward (SNA, 2.0 degrees and A-Y, 2.4mm) (P < 0.001) with a slight rotation of palatal and occlusal planes (SN-PP, -0.8 degree and SN-OP, -0.7 degree) (P > 0.05). The mandible displaced backwards and downwards (SNB, -1.1 degrees; SND, -0.9 degree; B-Y, -0.9 mm and Pog-Y, -0.3mm; P < 0.001). These movements in the maxilla and mandible caused a significant improvement in intermaxillary sagittal relationship (ANB, 3.0 degrees; Convexity, 6.3 degrees; Wits, 4.6mm; P < 0.001). The maxillary incisors moved forward (2.2 degrees) while the mandibular ones backward (-1.9 degrees). The improvement in overjet was 5.0mm, and 66.1 per cent of this change (3.3mm) was skeletal (A-Y; 2.4mm and B-Y; -0.9 mm), and the remaining (1.7 mm) dentoalveolar (U1-NA; 0.9 mm and L1-NB; -0.8mm). The change in Ls-E measurement was more in the study group (2.1mm), and the difference between the groups was statistically significant (P < 0.001).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23460730     DOI: 10.1093/ejo/cjt006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Orthod        ISSN: 0141-5387            Impact factor:   3.075


  7 in total

1.  Comparison of the soft and hard tissue effects of two different protraction mechanisms in class III patients: a randomized clinical trial.

Authors:  Mevlut Celikoglu; Ibrahim Yavuz; Tuba Unal; Husamettin Oktay; Abdulvahit Erdem
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2015-02-25       Impact factor: 3.573

2.  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

3.  Evaluation of the effects of skeletal anchoraged Forsus FRD using miniplates inserted on mandibular symphysis: A new approach for the treatment of Class II malocclusion.

Authors:  Tuba Unal; Mevlut Celikoglu; Celal Candirli
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2014-10-03       Impact factor: 2.079

4.  Effects of face mask treatment with and without rapid maxillary expansion in young adult subjects.

Authors:  Koray Halicioglu; Ibrahim Yavuz; Ismail Ceylan; Abdulvahit Erdem
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2014-03-14       Impact factor: 2.079

5.  A Case of Extreme Skeletal Class III Malocclusion Beyond the Envelope of Discrepancy, Managed Effectively by a Modified Ortho-Surgical Protocol.

Authors:  Priya Jeyaraj; Pankaj Juneja
Journal:  J Maxillofac Oral Surg       Date:  2020-03-27

6.  Effect of adding daytime Class III Elastics to the alternate rapid maxillary expansion-constriction and reverse headgear therapy - A randomized clinical trial.

Authors:  Jean James; Shobha Sundareswaran; Shijo Davis
Journal:  J Orthod Sci       Date:  2020-08-18

Review 7.  Treatment Options for Class III Malocclusion in Growing Patients with Emphasis on Maxillary Protraction.

Authors:  Zeinab Azamian; Farinaz Shirban
Journal:  Scientifica (Cairo)       Date:  2016-04-10
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.