Literature DB >> 23621558

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

Marta Morales-Fernández1, Alejandro Iglesias-Linares, Rosa Maria Yañez-Vico, Asuncion Mendoza-Mendoza, Enrique Solano-Reina.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To analyze the scientific literature and compare in the results of conventional orthopedic appliances with those obtained from recent bone-anchored orthopedics for Class III malocclusion.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The literature was systematically reviewed using PubMed/Medline, Scopus, and Scirus databases up to January 2012. Articles were selected by two different researchers (kappa index  =  0.83), based on established inclusion/exclusion criteria. Methodologic quality was classified as high, medium, or low quality.
RESULTS: The search strategy identified 1020 titles. Thirty studies were selected after applying the criteria (high quality  =  9, medium quality  =  21). Protraction rates differed within a range of one- to twofold between bone-anchored and dentoalveolar therapies (P < .001). All studies noted the effect of clockwise rotation on the mandible and an increase in inferior-anterior and total facial height; this was more obvious in dentoalveolar therapy than in bone-anchored orthopedics (P < .001).
CONCLUSIONS: Dental parameters like overjet increased significantly with both sets of groups, ranging from 1.7 to 7.9 mm with dentoalveolar therapy and from 2.7 to 7.6 mm with bone-anchored orthopedics.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23621558      PMCID: PMC8763068          DOI: 10.2319/051312-392.1

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


  44 in total

1.  The effectiveness of protraction face mask therapy: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  J H Kim; M A Viana; T M Graber; F F Omerza; E A BeGole
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  1999-06       Impact factor: 2.650

Review 2.  Systematic review of self-ligating brackets.

Authors:  Stephanie Shih-Hsuan Chen; Geoffrey Michael Greenlee; Jihyun-Elizabeth Kim; Craig L Smith; Greg J Huang
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 2.650

3.  Soft tissue profile changes following maxillary protraction in Class III subjects.

Authors:  Nihat Kilic; Gulhan Catal; Ali Kiki; Hüsamettin Oktay
Journal:  Eur J Orthod       Date:  2010-01-06       Impact factor: 3.075

4.  Treatment and post-treatment effects of facemask therapy on the sagittal pharyngeal dimensions in Class III subjects.

Authors:  Tiziano Baccetti; Lorenzo Franchi; Manuela Mucedero; Paola Cozza
Journal:  Eur J Orthod       Date:  2009-09-13       Impact factor: 3.075

5.  The effects of miniscrew with Class III traction in growing patients with maxillary deficiency.

Authors:  Abdolreza Jamilian; Afshin Haraji; Rahman Showkatbakhsh; Naser Valaee
Journal:  Int J Orthod Milwaukee       Date:  2011

6.  Chin cup therapy for mandibular prognathism.

Authors:  L W Graber
Journal:  Am J Orthod       Date:  1977-07

7.  Skeletal changes of maxillary protraction in patients exhibiting skeletal class III malocclusion: a comparison of three skeletal maturation groups.

Authors:  Kyung-Suk Cha
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 2.079

8.  Orthopedic traction of the maxilla with miniplates: a new perspective for treatment of midface deficiency.

Authors:  Hugo J De Clerck; Marie A Cornelis; Lucia H Cevidanes; Gavin C Heymann; Camilla J F Tulloch
Journal:  J Oral Maxillofac Surg       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 1.895

9.  Cephalometric variables predicting the long-term success or failure of combined rapid maxillary expansion and facial mask therapy.

Authors:  Tiziano Baccetti; Lorenzo Franchi; James A McNamara
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  2004-07       Impact factor: 2.650

10.  Long-term effects of chincap therapy on skeletal profile in mandibular prognathism.

Authors:  J Sugawara; T Asano; N Endo; H Mitani
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  1990-08       Impact factor: 2.650

View more
  5 in total

1.  Dental compensation for skeletal Class III malocclusion by isolated extraction of mandibular teeth. Part 1: Occlusal situation 12 years after completion of active treatment.

Authors:  Bernd Zimmer; Sarah Schenk-Kazan
Journal:  J Orofac Orthop       Date:  2015-05       Impact factor: 1.938

2.  A comparative evaluation of skeletal, dental, and soft tissue changes with skeletal anchored and conventional facemask protraction therapy.

Authors:  Tulika Tripathi; Priyank Rai; Navneet Singh; Shilpa Kalra
Journal:  J Orthod Sci       Date:  2016 Jul-Sep

3.  Imaging study of midface growth with bone-borne trans-sutural distraction osteogenesis therapy in growing cleft lip and palate patients.

Authors:  Haizhou Tong; Tao Song; Xiaomei Sun; Ningbei Yin; Lei Liu; Xingang Wang; Zhenmin Zhao
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-01-29       Impact factor: 4.379

4.  Short-term and long-term treatment outcomes with Class III activator.

Authors:  Hyo-Kyung Ryu; Hyun-Jeong Chong; Ki-Yong An; Kyung-Hwa Kang
Journal:  Korean J Orthod       Date:  2015-09-23       Impact factor: 1.372

Review 5.  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
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.