A Comparison of pre and post-surgical characteristics in skeletal Class III malocclusion patients using counterpart analysis

구조적 대응체 분석법에 의한 골격성 II급 부정교합 환자의 악교정 수술전후의 비교

  • Sohn, Byung-Wha (Department of Orthodontics, College of Dentistry, Yonsei University) ;
  • Kyung, Seung-Hyun (Department of Orthodontics, Institute of Oral Health Science, Samsung Medical Center, College of Medicine, Sungkyunkwan University) ;
  • Kim, Beom-soo (Department of Orthodontics, College of Dentistry, Yonsei University)
  • 손병화 (연세대학교 치과대학 교정학교실, 두개안면기형 연구소) ;
  • 경승현 (성균관대학교 의과대학 삼성서울병원 교정과) ;
  • 김범수 (연세대학교 치과대학 교정학교실)
  • Published : 2004.02.01

Abstract

Enlow's counterpart analysis explains the complex with anatomic and developmental characteristics where craniofacial aspect of Individuals has been developed. Counterpart analysis does not compare individual measurement with the normal value from the average of majority but analyzes by comparison of values that each individual has. In this study we examined surgical changes in skeletal Class III malocclusion patients(male 40, female 40) and compared them with normal occlusion patients using counterpart analysis. The results indicated that : 1. Skeletal anterior-posterior discrepancy was relieved by shortening of the ramus width(B3). 2. The ramus alignment(R3, R4) was displaced posteriorly and the occlusal plane angle(R5) was rotated clockwise. 3. Skeletal Class III pattern was relieved in the post-operative group, but differences in the level of the cranium(R1, R2) was remaining compared to the normal occlusion patients. 4. In the comparison of surgery methods, the two-jaw surgery group presented changes In the maxillary length(A4), ramus alignment(R3, R4) and occlusal plane angle(R5) compared to the one-jaw surgery group, but the differences were not significant. In the past study about Korean skeletal Class m patients, the skeletal characteristics are upward backward rotation of the cranial base, posterior displacement of the maxilla, forward inclination of the ramus and lengthening of the mandibular body, but in this study, skeletal Class m pattern was relieved by shortening of the ramus width and maxillary advancement by orthognathic surgery, because orthognathic surgery is usually performed on limited areas in the maxilla and the mandible.

Enlow의 구조적 대응체 분석법은 다수의 평균에 의한 정상치와 비교하는 분석법과는 달리 개개인에서 두 개안면의 구성양상이 발달되어온 해부학적, 발육학적 특징의 복합체를 설명하는 방법이다. 본 연구에서는 악교정 수술을 시행한 골격성 III급 부정교합 환자 80명(남자 40명, 여자 40명)을 대상으로 구조적 대응체 분석법을 이용하여 수술 전후를 비교하고, 정상교합자와 비교하여 다음과 같은 결과를 얻었다. 1. 수술에 의해서 주로 하악지 전후방 길이(B3)가 감소되어 상하악의 전후방적 부조화가 해소되었다. 2. 수술에 의해서 하악지의 배열(R3, R4)이 후방으로 재배열되었으며 교합평면(R5)은 후하방으로 회전되었다. 3. 수술후와 정상교합자의 비교결과 수술후에 골격성 III급 양상은 해소되었으나 두개저수준(R1, R2)에서는 차이를 보이고 있다. 4. 수술방법에 따른 비교결과 양악수술은 상악골의 길이(A4), 하악지의 배열(R3, R4), 교합평면의 각도(R5)에서 하악수술과 차이를 보였으나 두 그룹간의 차이는 크지 않았다. 한국인 골격성 III급 부정교합자의 특징을 살펴본 지난 연구에서 골격적 원인은 두개저의 후상방회전, 상악골의 후방위치, 하악지의 전방경사, 하악골체부의 길이증가였는데 본 연구 결과 실제 수술에서 개선되는 요소는 주로 하악지의 전후방 길이 감소, 상악골의 전진이기 때문에 상대적인 개선으로 골격성 III급 양상이 해소되었다고 볼 수 있다. 이러한 결과는 실제적인 수술부위가 상악골과 하악골의 일부에 국한되기 때문이다.

Keywords

References

  1. Downs WB. Variations in facial relationships : Their significance in treatment and prognosis. Am J Orthod 1948 : 34 : 812-40 https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(48)90015-3
  2. Downs WB. Analysis of dentofacial profile. Angle Orthod 1956 : 26: 191-212
  3. Jarabak JR. Technique and treatment with light wire edgewise appli-ance. 2nd ed.St Louis : CV Mosby, 1972 : 128-66
  4. Ricketts RM. A foundation for cephalometric communication. Am J Orthod 1960 : 46 : 330-57
  5. Burstone CJ, Tames RB, Legau H, Murphy GA, Norton LA. Cephalo-metrics for orthognathic surgery. J Oral Surg 1978 : 36 : 269-77
  6. Burstone CJ. Lip posture and its significance in treatment planning. Am J Orthod 1967 : 53 : 262-84
  7. Burstone CJ. The integumental profile. Am J Orthod 1958 : 44 : 1-25
  8. Wylie WL. The assessment of anteroposterior dysplasia. Angle Orthod 1947 : 17 : 97-109
  9. Enlow DH, Moyers ER, Hunter WS, McNamara JA Jr. A procedure for analysis of intrinsic facial form and growth. An equivalent-balance concept. Am J Orthod 1969 : 56 : 6-23
  10. Enlow DH, Kuroda T, Lewis AB. The morphological and morpho-genetic basis for craniofacial form and pattern. Angle Orthod 1971 : 41 : 161-88
  11. 손병화, 이윤정, 양춘식. 구조적 대응체 분석법에 의한 한국인 악안면 두개골격형태에 관한 연구. 대치교정지 2000 : 30 : 509-19
  12. 손병화, 이기준, 모성서. 구조적 대응체 분석법에 의한 한국인 골격성 III급 부정교합의 특징. 대치교정지 2002 : 30 : 509-19
  13. Oka T, Kawamoto T. Craniofacial pattern of Japanese adults with various types of malocclusion : a counterpartanalysis. Journal of Osaka Dental University 1994 : 28 : 1-16
  14. Chang HP. Huang HH. Craniofacial pattern of young adults with var-ious types of malocclusion. Kaohsiung Journal of Medical Sciences 1998 : 14 : 168-76
  15. Bjork A. Some biological aspects of prognathism an occlusion of teeth. Acta Odont Scand 1950 : 9 : 1-40
  16. Rakosi T. Treatment of Class III malocclusion. Graber TM, Rakosi T, Petrovic AG, editors. Dentofacial orthopedics with functional appliances. St. Louis : CV Mosby, 1997 : 461-480
  17. Pike JB, Sundheim RA Skeletal and dental responses to orthognathic surgical treatment. Angle Orthod 1997 : 67 : 447-54
  18. Bell WH. Modem practice in orthognathic and reconstructive surgery. Philadelphia :WB Saunders, 1992 : 676-701
  19. 박형식, 허진영, 김기정 등. 구내 하악골 상행지 수직 골절단술 후의 개교합 및 희귀 성향에 관한 임상적 연구. 대한구강악안면외과학회지 1997 : 23 : 35-42
  20. Komori E, Aigase K, Sugisaki M, Tanabe H. Cause of early skeletal relapse after mandibular setback. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1989 : 95 : 29-36
  21. Franco JE, Sickels JE, Thrash WJ. Factors contributing to relapse in rigidly fixed mandibular setbacks. J oral Maxillofac Surg 1989 : 47 : 451-6
  22. Bell WH. Modern practice in orthognathic and reconstructive surgery. Philadelphia : WB Saunders, 1992 : 2111-39
  23. Proffit WR, Phillips C, Dann C IV, Turvery TA. Stability after surgical-orthodontic correction of skeletal Class III malocclusion. I. Mandi-bular setback. Int J Adult Orthod Othognath Surg 1991 : 6 : 7-18
  24. Ghali GE. Sikes JW Jr. Intraoral vertical ramus osteotomy as the preferred treatment for mandibular prognathism. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2000 : 58 : 313-5 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0278-2391(00)90063-6
  25. Artun J, Krogstad O, Little RM. Stability of mandibular incisors follo-wing excessive proclination : a studyon adults with surgically treated mandibular prognathism. Angle Orthod 2000 : 60 : 99-106
  26. Finn RA, Throckmorton GS, Bell WH, Legan HL. Biomechanical considerations in the surgical correction of mandibular deficiency. J Oral Surg 1980 : 38 : 257-64
  27. Wolford LM. Chemello PD. Hilliard F. Occlusalplane alteration in orthognathic surgery-Part I : Effects on function and esthetics. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1994 : 106 : 304-16
  28. Chemello PD. Wolford LM. Buschang PH. Occlusalplane alteration in orthognathicsurgery-Part II : Long -term stability of results. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1994 : 106 : 434-40
  29. 손병화, 이윤정. 제III급 부정교합자의 양악수술후 교합평면의 안정성에 관한 연구. 대치교정지 2000 : 30 : 643-55
  30. Proffit WR, Turvey TA, Phillips C. Orthognathic surgery : A hiera-rchy of stability. Int J AdultOrthod Orthognath Surg 1996 : 11 : 191-204
  31. Thompson JR. The individuality of the patient in facial skeletal gro-wth : Part 2. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1994 : 105 : 117-27 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-5406(94)70107-5