| Literature DB >> 36148644 |
Jin-Young Choi1, Bai Jin1, Seong-Hun Kim1.
Abstract
Anterior open bite and transverse discrepancy are often accompanied by hyperdivergent skeletal patterns. In addition, degenerative joint disorders and vertical maxillary excess contribute to an unfavorable convex facial profile with a retruded chin. Correction of this complex three-dimensional problem with orthodontic treatment alone is considered challenging owing to anatomical limitations. Moreover, a history of orthodontic treatment with premolar extraction makes retreatment difficult. This case report illustrates the application of a maxillary tissue bone-borne expander and biocreative reverse curve system in a 23-year-old female patient with a severe anterior open bite and transverse discrepancy who underwent orthodontic treatment with four premolar extractions. By setting the treatment target under precise diagnosis and using appropriate appliances, a satisfactory treatment result could be achieved without orthognathic surgery.Entities:
Keywords: Class II; Expansion; Miniplate; Relapse
Year: 2022 PMID: 36148644 PMCID: PMC9512628 DOI: 10.4041/kjod22.158
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Korean J Orthod Impact factor: 1.361
Figure 1Pretreatment facial and intraoral photographs.
Figure 2Pretreatment panoramic radiograph and lateral cephalometric radiograph.
Pretreatment and posttreatment measurements of cephalometric analysis
| Measurement | Pre- | Post- | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Skeletal | |||
| SNA (°) | 73.15 | 72.80 | −0.35 |
| SNB (°) | 64.10 | 62.69 | −1.41 |
| ANB (°) | 9.04 | 10.12 | +1.08 |
| FMA (°) | 46.70 | 44.70 | −2.00 |
| OP-FH (°) | 17.72 | 19.46 | +1.74 |
| YTI (mm) | −0.92 | 1.74 | +2.66 |
| PHI (%) | 66.45 | 55.15 | −11.30 |
| Dental | |||
| U1 to FH (°) | 115.08 | 106.73 | −8.35 |
| U1 exposure (mm) | 13.00 | 8.94 | −4.06 |
| L1 to APog (mm) | 2.17 | 7.58 | +5.41 |
| IMPA (°) | 95.52 | 89.21 | −6.31 |
| U6 to PP (mm) | 33.14 | 29.22 | −3.92 |
| Mx IMW | 41.25 | 43.51 | +2.26 |
| Mn IMW | 44.13 | 43.90 | −0.23 |
| Soft tissue | |||
| Superior airway | 23.69 | 25.25 | +1.56 |
| Inferior airway | 7.62 | 9.68 | +2.06 |
SNA, sella-nasion-A point; SNB, sella-nasion-B point; ANB, A point-nasion-B point; FMA, Frankfort-mandibular plane angle; OP-FH, occlusal plane-Frankfort horizontal plane angle; YTI, Yonsei transverse index; PHI, palatal height index; U1, upper incisor; L1, lower incisor; Pog, pogonion; IMPA, lower incisor to mandibular plane angle; U6, upper first molar; PP, palatal plane; Mx IMW, maxillary intermolar width, distance between the central fossae of the right and left first maxillary molars; Mn IMW, mandibular intermolar width, distance between the tips of the distobuccal cusps of the right and left first mandibular molars.
Figure 3Diagram explaining the treatment plan. Black arrows indicate the direction of tooth movement. A, Transverse palatal expansion by C-expander. Lateral movement of the posterior teeth was planned with the bony expansion. B, Simultaneous palatal and buccal intrusion using miniscrews of the C-expander and buccal C-tube miniplate. C, Molar uprighting by biocreative reverse curve system using C-tube miniplate at the symphyseal area, and total intrusive retraction of the maxillary dentition by buccal C-tube miniplate. Uprighting moments would occur in the posterior teeth by lifting the reverse curve nickel-titanium archwire upward at the symphyseal region.
Figure 4Application of the biocreative reverse curve system on the mandibular posterior teeth.
Figure 5Procedure of the C-expander placement.
Figure 6Treatment progress using the C-expander and biocreative reverse curve system.
Figure 7Cone beam computed tomography images before and after palatal expansion with C-expander.
Figure 8Treatment progress after removing the resin part of the C-expander and bonding brackets on the maxillary dentition.
Figure 9Finishing and detailing stage after removing the C-tube miniplate and bonding brackets on the mandibular dentition.
Figure 10Posttreatment facial and intraoral photographs.
Figure 11Posttreatment panoramic radiograph and lateral cephalometric radiograph.
Figure 12Superimposition between pretreatment and posttreatment cephalometric radiographs.
Figure 13Lateral facial photo and cephalometric radiograph after advancement genioplasty.
Figure 14Intraoral photographs taken at 4-year follow-up.