Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Evaluation of maxillary protraction and fixed appliance therapy in Class III patients.
Eur J Orthod. 2006 Aug; 28(4):383-92.EJ

Abstract

The aim of this study was to examine the dentofacial changes in Class III patients treated with fixed appliances subsequent to rapid maxillary expansion (RME) and facemask therapy. The material consisted of the cephalograms and hand-wrist films of 14 (9 girls, 5 boys) skeletal Class III and 15 (10 girls, 5 boys) untreated subjects obtained at the beginning of treatment/observation T1, immediately after orthopaedic therapy T2, and at the end of the observation period T3. The mean pre-treatment/control ages were approximately 11.5 years and the observation period was 3 years T2-T1: 1 year, T3-T2: 2 years). The cephalometric films were analysed according to the structural superimposition method of Björk. All tracings were double-digitized and the measurements were calculated by a computer program. Intragroup changes and intergroup differences were statistically analysed. Forward movement of the maxilla (P < 0.01), backward movement and rotation of the mandible, an increase in the ANB angle (P < 0.001), lower face height and overjet (P < 0.001), a decrease of overbite, and an improvement in the sagittal lip relationship (P < 0.01) presented significant intergroup differences between T2 and T1. During the second phase of treatment T3-T2, although not statistically significant, forward movement of the maxilla was less than in the control subjects. Overall changes during the observation period T3-T1 revealed that correction was mainly due to favourable changes in the mandibular and dentoalveolar components of the discrepancy, while these in maxillary position were not different from the control group. The soft tissue profile improved significantly (P < 0.001) in the treatment group. Comparison with the Class I controls at the end of the observation period confirmed that some Class III characteristics still remained in the treated patients.

Authors+Show Affiliations

Department of Orthodontics, Faculties of Dentistry, Başkent University, Turkey.No affiliation info availableNo affiliation info available

Pub Type(s)

Comparative Study
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial

Language

eng

PubMed ID

16731542

Citation

Arman, Ayça, et al. "Evaluation of Maxillary Protraction and Fixed Appliance Therapy in Class III Patients." European Journal of Orthodontics, vol. 28, no. 4, 2006, pp. 383-92.
Arman A, Ufuk Toygar T, Abuhijleh E. Evaluation of maxillary protraction and fixed appliance therapy in Class III patients. Eur J Orthod. 2006;28(4):383-92.
Arman, A., Ufuk Toygar, T., & Abuhijleh, E. (2006). Evaluation of maxillary protraction and fixed appliance therapy in Class III patients. European Journal of Orthodontics, 28(4), 383-92.
Arman A, Ufuk Toygar T, Abuhijleh E. Evaluation of Maxillary Protraction and Fixed Appliance Therapy in Class III Patients. Eur J Orthod. 2006;28(4):383-92. PubMed PMID: 16731542.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - Evaluation of maxillary protraction and fixed appliance therapy in Class III patients. AU - Arman,Ayça, AU - Ufuk Toygar,T, AU - Abuhijleh,Eyas, Y1 - 2006/05/26/ PY - 2006/5/30/pubmed PY - 2006/11/15/medline PY - 2006/5/30/entrez SP - 383 EP - 92 JF - European journal of orthodontics JO - Eur J Orthod VL - 28 IS - 4 N2 - The aim of this study was to examine the dentofacial changes in Class III patients treated with fixed appliances subsequent to rapid maxillary expansion (RME) and facemask therapy. The material consisted of the cephalograms and hand-wrist films of 14 (9 girls, 5 boys) skeletal Class III and 15 (10 girls, 5 boys) untreated subjects obtained at the beginning of treatment/observation T1, immediately after orthopaedic therapy T2, and at the end of the observation period T3. The mean pre-treatment/control ages were approximately 11.5 years and the observation period was 3 years T2-T1: 1 year, T3-T2: 2 years). The cephalometric films were analysed according to the structural superimposition method of Björk. All tracings were double-digitized and the measurements were calculated by a computer program. Intragroup changes and intergroup differences were statistically analysed. Forward movement of the maxilla (P < 0.01), backward movement and rotation of the mandible, an increase in the ANB angle (P < 0.001), lower face height and overjet (P < 0.001), a decrease of overbite, and an improvement in the sagittal lip relationship (P < 0.01) presented significant intergroup differences between T2 and T1. During the second phase of treatment T3-T2, although not statistically significant, forward movement of the maxilla was less than in the control subjects. Overall changes during the observation period T3-T1 revealed that correction was mainly due to favourable changes in the mandibular and dentoalveolar components of the discrepancy, while these in maxillary position were not different from the control group. The soft tissue profile improved significantly (P < 0.001) in the treatment group. Comparison with the Class I controls at the end of the observation period confirmed that some Class III characteristics still remained in the treated patients. SN - 0141-5387 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/16731542/Evaluation_of_maxillary_protraction_and_fixed_appliance_therapy_in_Class_III_patients_ L2 - https://academic.oup.com/ejo/article-lookup/doi/10.1093/ejo/cjl008 DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -