The korean journal of orthodontics (대한치과교정학회지)

The Korean Association Of Orthodontists (대한치과교정학회)
권호 표지

The effects of maxillary protraction appliance (MPA) depending on vertical facial patterns

수직적 안모 형태에 따른 상악골 전방 견인 장치의 효과 비교

  • Ryu, Young-Kyu (Department of Orthodontics, College of Dentistry Yonsei University) ;
  • Lee, Kee-Joon (Department of Orthodontics, College of Dentistry Yonsei University) ;
  • Oh, Chang-Hun (Department of Orthodontics, College of Dentistry Yonsei University)
  • 유영규 (연세대학교 치과대학 교정학교실) ;
  • 이기준 (연세대학교 치과대학 교정학교실) ;
  • 오창훈 (연세대학교 치과대학 교정학교실)
  • Published : 2002.12.01
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Preadolescent children with deficient maxillae are suitable candidates for the maxillary protraction appliance(MPA). The theoretical effect of the MPA is protraction or anterior displacement of the maxilla. However, it is known that complex effects such as anterior displacement of the maxillary teeth, downward and backward rotation of the mandible, linguoversion of the mandibular anterior incisors, are known to play a role in improving the Cl III malocclusion. There have been much studies with regard to maxillary protraction, but the different effects of MPAs depending on the vertical facial pattern are not known precisely. This study was based on 67 patients (31 males, 36 females) aged from 6 years 6 months to 13 years 3months, who visited the Dept. of Orthodontics at Yonsei Univ., Dental Hospital and diagnosed as skeletal Class III with maxillary deficiency. They were divided into 3 groups (low, average, high angle groups) depending on genial angle and the SNMP (Go-Gn) angle, respectively. Pretreatment and post-treatment lateral cephalograms were used to compare the effects of MPA and the following conclusions were obtained: 1) A significantly large amount of backward movement of the B point was observed in patients with a low SNMP angle. Those with a high SNMP angle had significant forward movement at A point. 2) The patients with low genial angle had the least forward movement at the A point, and those with a high angle had more forward movement. 3) In comparing the arcTan of the A point, the high angle group showed more horizontal movement while the low angle group showed more vertical movement. 4) There was no significance between the treatment duration of the SNMP and the Genial angle groups.

성장기 아동에서 상악골 열성장을 보이는 제III급 부정교합은 상악골 전방 견인 장치의 적응증이 된다. 상악골 전방 견인장치의 바람직한 효과는 상악골의 전방 이동이지만, 실제로는 상악 치아의 전방 이동, 하악골의 후하방 회전, 하악 전치의 설측 이동 등의 복합적인 결과로 III급 관계가 개선된다고 알려져 있다. 그러나 수직적 안모 유형별로는 상악골 전방 견인 장치의 효과에 대한 차이는 잘 알려진 바가 없다 본 연구는 1998년-2000년 사이에 연세대학교 치과병원 교정과에 내원한 환자들 중 초진시 나이는 6세 6개월에서 13세 3개월 사이의 상악골 열성장을 동반한 제 III급 부정교합으로 진단된 67명 (남 36, 여 31)을 대상으로, 안모유형별로 SNMP군과 Gonial angle군에서 low, average, high로 세부군을 나누어 치료전 측모 두부방사선 규격사진을 통해 상악골 전방견인 장치의 효과를 비교하여 다음과 같은 결과를 얻었다. 1) SNMP군의 low angle에서 B point의 후방이동량이 많았으며, High angle에서는 A point의 전방이동량이 컸다. 2) Genial angle군의 low angle에서 A point의 전방이동양이 가장 적었으며, high angle에서는 A point의 전방이동량이 상대적으로 많았다. 3) A point에 대한 arcTan를 구한 결과 A point의 이동 각도는 장안모 군에서 더 수평적인 이동 양상을 보였고, 단안모 군에서는 수직적 이동양상이 강했다. 4) SNMP군과 Gonial angle의 세부군에서 치료기간별 유의성은 없었다.

Keywords

References

  1. Graber LW. Chincup therapy for mandibular prognathism. Am J Orthod 1977: 72: 23-41 https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(77)90122-1
  2. Sugawara J, Asano T, Endo N, Mitani H. Long term effects of chin cap therapy on skeletal profile in mandibular prognathism. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1990: 98 : 127-33 https://doi.org/10.1016/0889-5406(90)70006-X
  3. Cozzani G. Extraoral traction and Class III treatment. Am J Orthod 1981 : 80 : 638-650 https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(81)90266-9
  4. HS Baik. Clinical results of maxillary protraction in Korean children. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1995: 108 : 583-592 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-5406(95)70003-X
  5. Chong YH, Ive JC, Artun J. Changes following the use of pro-traction headgear for early correction of Class III malocclusion. Angle Orthod 1996 : 66 : 351-362
  6. Oppenheim A. A possibility for physiologic orthodontic movement, Am. J. Orthod., 1944 : 30 : 345-368 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0096-6347(44)90075-X
  7. Kambara T. Dentofacial changes produced by extraoral forward force in Macaca irus. Am J Orthod 1977 : 71 : 249-277 https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(77)90187-7
  8. Jackson GW, Kokich VG, Shapiro PA. Experimental and postexperimental response to anteriorly directed extraoral force in young Macaca nemsestrina. Am J Orthod 1979 : 75 : 318-333 https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(79)90278-1
  9. Shanker S. Salazar RW, Taliercio EW. et al. Cephalometric A point changes during and after maxillary protraction and expansion. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1996 : 110 : 423-430 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-5406(96)70046-X
  10. Saadia M, Torres E. Sagittal changes after maxillary protraction in Class III patients in the primary, mixed and late mixed dentitions. Am J Orthod Dentolac Orthop 2000 : 117 : 669-680 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-5406(00)70176-4
  11. Ngan PW, Hagg U, Yiu C, Wei SH, Treatment response and long-term dentotacial adaptations to maxillary expansion and protraction. Semin Orthod 1997: 3 : 255-64 https://doi.org/10.1016/S1073-8746(97)80058-8
  12. Deguchi T, Kuroda T, Hunt NP, Graber TM, Long-term applica-tion of chincup force alters the morphology of the dolichofacial Class III mandible. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1999 : 116: 610-615 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-5406(99)70194-0
  13. Schudy FF. The vertical dimension of the human face. Houston: D. Armstrong Co. 1992
  14. Schudy FF. Vertical growth versus anteroposterior growth as rela-ted to function and treatment. Angle Orthod 1964 : 34 : 75-93
  15. Bjork A. Prediction of mandibular growth rotation, Am J Orthod 1969 : 55 : 585-99 https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(69)90036-0
  16. Bjrk A, Skieller V. Normal and abnormal growth of the mandible, A synthesis of longitudinal studies over a period of 25years. Eur J Orthod 1984: 6 : 1-14
  17. Issacson JR, Issacson RJ, Spiedel TM, Worms FW, Extreme variation in vertical facial growth and associated variations in skeletal and dental relations Angle Orthod 1971 : 41 : 219-29
  18. Ricketts RM. Planning treatment on the basis of the facial pattern and an estrmate of its growth. Angle Orthod 1957 : 27 : 14-37
  19. Siriwat PP, Jarabak JR. Malocclusion and facial morphology: Is there a relationship? Angle Orthod 1985 : 55 : 127-38
  20. Moller E. The chewing apparatus. An electromyographic study of the action of the muscles of mastication and Its correlation to facial morphology, Acta Physiol Scand 69 : Supp. 1966 : 280 : 1-229
  21. Ingervall B, Thuer U, Kuster R, lack of correlation between mouth breathing andbiteforce. Eur J Orthod 1989 : 11 : 43-46 https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.ejo.a035963
  22. Proffit WR, Fields HW. Occlusal forces In normal and long-face adults. J Dent Res 1983 : 62 : 571-4 https://doi.org/10.1177/00220345830620051301
  23. Schendel SA, Eisenfeld J, Bell WH, Epker BN, The long face syndrome:vertical maxillary excess. Am J Orthod 1976 : 70 : 398-408 https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(76)90112-3
  24. Opdebeeck H, Bell WHo The short face symcrorne. Am J Orthod 1978 : 73 : 499-511 https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(78)90240-3
  25. Sassouni V, Nanda S, Analysis of dentofacial vertical proportions. Am J Orthod 1964 : 50 : 801-823 https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(64)90039-9
  26. Houston WJ, The analysis of errors in orthodontic measurements. Am J Orthod 1983: 83 : 382-90 https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(83)90322-6
  27. HS Baik, KH Kim, Y Park. The distribution and trends in malocclusion patients: a 10 year study of 2155 patients from YDSH. Korean J Orthod. 1995: 25: 87-100
  28. JH Kim, Viana MA, Graber TM, Omerza FF, BeGole EA, The effectiveness of protraction face mask therapy:a meta-analysis. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1999 : 115: 675-85 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-5406(99)70294-5
  29. HS Baik. Clinical effects and stability of the maxillary protraction usion the lateral cephalogram in Korea. Korean J Orthod. 1992 : 22: 509-26
  30. Suda N, Lshit-Suzu Kim, Hirose K, et al. Effective treatment plan for maxillary protraction: Is the boneage useful to determine the treatment plan? Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2000 : 118: 5562
  31. Irie M, Nakamura S. Orthopedic approach to severe skeletal Class III malocclusion. Am J Orthod 1975: 67 : 377-392 https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(75)90020-2
  32. William R. Proffit. Contemporary orthodontics. St Louis: Mosby, 2000
  33. Ueda HM, Miyamoto K, Saiffuddin, Ishizuka Y, Tanne K. Masticatory muscle activity in children and adults with different facial types. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2000 : 118: 63-68 https://doi.org/10.1067/mod.2000.99142
  34. Merwin D, Ngan P, Hagg U, Yiu C, Wei SH. Timing for effective application of anteriorly directed orthopedic force to the maxilla. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1997 : 112 : 292-299 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-5406(97)70259-2