Literature DB >> 32342120

Maxillary protraction in patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate : Evaluation of soft and hard tissues using the Alt-RAMEC protocol.

Ege Dogan1, Ozlem Seckin2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the hard and soft tissue effects and differences of the Alt-RAMEC protocol to the facemask and conventional facemask protocols in patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate.
METHODS: This prospective study was carried out with 30 patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate with skeletal and dental class III malocclusions who were referred to a university department of orthodontics. The patients were evaluated with the cervical vertebral maturation method and divided into two groups, each consisting of 15 patients. The patients in group I (mean age 10.00 ± 0.73 years) were treated according to conventional facemask protocol, and the patients in group II (mean age 10.07 ± 2.43 years) were treated according to the Alt-RAMEC protocol before facemask application. Lateral cephalometric radiographs were evaluated by using the Dolphin Imaging Software version 11.7. The skeletal, dentoalveolar and soft tissue differences and treatment times were evaluated.
RESULTS: Group II demonstrated a 5.73° increase in SNA, which was statistically significant, while this increase was 3.13° in group I (p < 0.001). Results for Co‑A and A‑PTV showed a significant increase for group II only (group I: 1.02 mm, 1.06 mm, group II: 3.02 mm, 2.21 mm; p < 0.05 and p < 0.01, respectively). In addition, group II presented significant increase for the values of ANB, N‑A-Pg, SN/MP, Wits, U1-SN, U1-L1, U1-PTV, U1-FHP, U6-PTV, U6-FHP, overjet, Ss-PTV, UL-PTV and UL‑S line (p < 0.001). The treatment mean times were 7.3 months in group I and 4.7 months in group II (p < 0.01).
CONCLUSION: Applying the facemask after having followed the Alt-RAMEC protocol induced more skeletal, dentoalveolar and soft tissue changes in comparison to the conventional facemask protocol in patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Angle class III malocclusion; Facial growth; Maxilla; Orofacial cleft; Rapid maxillary expansion

Mesh:

Year:  2020        PMID: 32342120     DOI: 10.1007/s00056-020-00220-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Orofac Orthop        ISSN: 1434-5293            Impact factor:   1.938


  19 in total

1.  A new protocol for maxillary protraction in cleft patients: repetitive weekly protocol of alternate rapid maxillary expansions and constrictions.

Authors:  Eric Jein-Wein Liou; Wen-Ching Tsai
Journal:  Cleft Palate Craniofac J       Date:  2005-03

2.  Toothborne orthopedic maxillary protraction in Class III patients.

Authors:  Eric Jein-Wein Liou
Journal:  J Clin Orthod       Date:  2005-02

3.  Effective maxillary orthopedic protraction for growing Class III patients: a clinical application simulates distraction osteogenesis.

Authors:  Eric Jein-Wein Liou
Journal:  Prog Orthod       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 2.750

4.  Opening of circumaxillary sutures by alternate rapid maxillary expansions and constrictions.

Authors:  Yu-Chi Wang; Peter M S Chang; Eric Jein-Wein Liou
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 2.079

5.  Comparison of the effects of face mask treatment started simultaneously and after the completion of the alternate rapid maxillary expansion and constriction procedure.

Authors:  Bilge H Canturk; Mevlut Celikoglu
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2014-07-14       Impact factor: 2.079

6.  Early class III facemask treatment with the hybrid hyrax and Alt-RAMEC protocol.

Authors:  Benedict Wilmes; Peter Ngan; Eric J W Liou; Lorenzo Franchi; Dieter Drescher
Journal:  J Clin Orthod       Date:  2014-02

7.  Early assessment of dental arch development in repaired unilateral cleft lip and unilateral cleft lip and palate versus controls.

Authors:  Ann Garrahy; Declan T Millett; Ashraf F Ayoub
Journal:  Cleft Palate Craniofac J       Date:  2005-07

8.  Effect of maxillary protraction with alternating rapid palatal expansion and constriction vs expansion alone in maxillary retrusive patients: a single-center, randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Weitao Liu; Yanheng Zhou; Xuedong Wang; Dawei Liu; Shaonan Zhou
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  2015-10       Impact factor: 2.650

9.  Short- and Long-Term Effects of Late Maxillary Advancement With the Liou-Alt-RAMEC Protocol in Unilateral Cleft Lip and Palate.

Authors:  Maria Costanza Meazzini; Laura B Zappia; Chiara Tortora; Luca Autelitano; Roberto Tintinelli
Journal:  Cleft Palate Craniofac J       Date:  2018-04-27

10.  Is alternate rapid maxillary expansion and constriction an effective protocol in the treatment of Class III malocclusion? A systematic review.

Authors:  Matheus Melo Pithon; Nathalia de Lima Santos; Camila Rangel Barreto Dos Santos; Felipe Carvalho Souza Baião; Murilo Costa Rangel Pinheiro; Manoel Matos; Ianderlei Andrade Souza; Rafael Pereira de Paula
Journal:  Dental Press J Orthod       Date:  2016 Nov-Dec
View more
  1 in total

1.  Preoperative analysis of upper lip in patients with upper cleft lip/palate before lip repair.

Authors:  Junyan Jing; Xiaoxuan Chen; Bing Shi; Yufeng Wang; Yongbin Mou; Yong Lu
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2021-04
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.