The korean journal of orthodontics (대한치과교정학회지)

The Korean Association Of Orthodontists (대한치과교정학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Comparison of treatment effects between the modified C-palatal plate and cervical pull headgear for total arch distalization in adults

  • Park, Chong Ook (Private Practice: Department of Orthodontics, The Catholic University of Korea and Seoul National University) ;
  • Sa'aed, Noor Laith (Dental Department, Iraqi Armed Hospital, Ministry of Defense) ;
  • Bayome, Mohamed (Dental Department, Iraqi Armed Hospital, Ministry of Defense) ;
  • Park, Jae Hyun (Postgraduate Orthodontic Program, Arizona School of Dentistry & Oral Health, A.T. Still University) ;
  • Kook, Yoon-Ah (Department of Orthodontics, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea) ;
  • Park, Young-Seok (Department of Oral Anatomy, Dental Research Institute and School of Dentistry, Seoul National University) ;
  • Han, Seong Ho (Division of Orthodontics, Department of Dentistry, St. Vincent's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea)
  • Received : 2016.10.19
  • Accepted : 2017.06.21
  • Published : 2017.11.25
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the dental and skeletal effects of the modified C-palatal plate (MCPP) for total arch distalization in adult patients with Class II malocclusion and compare the findings with those of cervical pull headgear. Methods: The study sample consisted of the lateral cephalograms of 44 adult patients with Class II Division 1 malocclusion, including 22 who received treatment with MCPP (age, $24.7{\pm}7.7years$) and 22 who received treatment with cervical pull headgear (age, $23.0{\pm}7.7years$). Pre- (T1) and post-treatment (T2) cephalograms were analyzed for 24 linear and angular measurements. Multivariate analysis of variance was performed to evaluate the changes after treatment in each group and differences in treatment effects between the two groups. Results: The mean amount of distalization at the crown and root levels of the maxillary first molar and the amount of distal tipping was 4.2 mm, 3.5 mm, and $3.9^{\circ}$ in the MCPP group, and 2.3 mm, 0.6 mm, and $8.6^{\circ}$ in the headgear group, respectively. In addition, intrusion by 2.5 mm was observed in the MCPP group. In both groups, the distal movement of the upper lip and the increase in the nasolabial angle were statistically significant (p < 0.001). However, none of the skeletal and soft tissue variables exhibited significant differences between the two groups. Conclusions: The results of this study suggest that MCPP is an effective treatment modality for total arch distalization in adults.

Keywords

References

  1. Greenspan RA. Reference charts for controlled extraoral force application to maxillary molars. Am J Orthod 1970;58:486-91. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(70)90025-4
  2. Haas AJ. Headgear therapy: the most efficient way to distalize molars. Semin Orthod 2000;6:79-90. https://doi.org/10.1053/od.2000.5900
  3. Jambi S, Thiruvenkatachari B, O'Brien KD, Walsh T. Orthodontic treatment for distalising upper first molars in children and adolescents. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013;(10):CD008375.
  4. Fontana M, Cozzani M, Caprioglio A. Noncompliance maxillary molar distalizing appliances: an overview of the last decade. Prog Orthod 2012;13:173-84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pio.2011.10.002
  5. Kinzinger GS, Eren M, Diedrich PR. Treatment effects of intraoral appliances with conventional anchorage designs for non-compliance maxillary molar distalization: a literature review. Eur J Orthod 2008;30:558-71. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjn047
  6. Caprioglio A, Cafagna A, Fontana M, Cozzani M. Comparative evaluation of molar distalization therapy using pendulum and distal screw appliances. Korean J Orthod 2015;45:171-9. https://doi.org/10.4041/kjod.2015.45.4.171
  7. Han S, Bayome M, Lee J, Lee YJ, Song HH, Kook YA. Evaluation of palatal bone density in adults and adolescents for application of skeletal anchorage devices. Angle Orthod 2012;82:625-31. https://doi.org/10.2319/071311-445.1
  8. Ryu JH, Park JH, Vu Thi Thu T, Bayome M, Kim Y, Kook YA. Palatal bone thickness compared with cone-beam computed tomography in adolescents and adults for mini-implant placement. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2012;142:207-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2012.03.027
  9. Vu T, Bayome M, Kook YA, Han SH. Evaluation of the palatal soft tissue thickness by conebeam computed tomography. Korean J Orthod 2012;42:291-6. https://doi.org/10.4041/kjod.2012.42.6.291
  10. Lee SM, Park JH, Bayome M, Kim HS, Mo SS, Kook YA. Palatal soft tissue thickness at different ages using an ultrasonic device. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2012;36:405-9. https://doi.org/10.17796/jcpd.36.4.58tm38928v522283
  11. Kook YA, Park JH, Kim Y, Ahn CS, Bayome M. Sagittal correction of adolescent patients with modified palatal anchorage plate appliances. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2015;148:674-84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2015.06.012
  12. Kook YA, Park JH, Kim Y, Ahn CS, Bayome M. Orthodontic treatment of skeletal class II adolescent with anterior open bite using mini-screws and modified palatal anchorage plate. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2015;39:187-92. https://doi.org/10.17796/jcpd.39.2.b5317m147r228760
  13. Sa'aed NL, Park CO, Bayome M, Park JH, Kim Y, Kook YA. Skeletal and dental effects of molar distalization using a modified palatal anchorage plate in adolescents. Angle Orthod 2015;85:657-64. https://doi.org/10.2319/060114-392.1
  14. Kook YA, Bayome M, Trang VT, Kim HJ, Park JH, Kim KB, et al. Treatment effects of a modified palatal anchorage plate for distalization evaluated with cone-beam computed tomography. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2014;146:47-54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2014.03.023
  15. Park HS, Yoon DY, Park CS, Jeoung SH. Treatment effects and anchorage potential of sliding mechanics with titanium screws compared with the Tweed- Merrifield technique. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2008;133:593-600. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.02.041
  16. Lai EH, Yao CC, Chang JZ, Chen I, Chen YJ. Threedimensional dental model analysis of treatment outcomes for protrusive maxillary dentition: comparison of headgear, miniscrew, and miniplate skeletal anchorage. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2008;134:636-45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2007.05.017
  17. Yao CC, Lai EH, Chang JZ, Chen I, Chen YJ. Comparison of treatment outcomes between skeletal anchorage and extraoral anchorage in adults with maxillary dentoalveolar protrusion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2008;134:615-24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.12.022
  18. Lee J, Miyazawa K, Tabuchi M, Kawaguchi M, Shibata M, Goto S. Midpalatal miniscrews and high-pull headgear for anteroposterior and vertical anchorage control: cephalometric comparisons of treatment changes. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2013;144:238-50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2013.03.020
  19. Chen M, Li ZM, Liu X, Cai B, Wang DW, Feng ZC. Differences of treatment outcomes between selfligating brackets with microimplant and headgear anchorages in adults with bimaxillary protrusion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2015;147:465-71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2014.11.029
  20. Grave K, Townsend G. Cervical vertebral maturation as a predictor of the adolescent growth spurt. Aust Orthod J 2003;19:25-32.
  21. Kook YA, Kim SH, Chung KR. A modified palatal anchorage plate for simple and efficient distalization. J Clin Orthod 2010;44:719-30; quiz 743.
  22. Kook YA, Lee DH, Kim SH, Chung KR. Design improvements in the modified C-palatal plate for molar distalization. J Clin Orthod 2013;47:241-8; quiz 267-8.
  23. Kirjavainen M, Hurmerinta K, Kirjavainen T. Facial profile changes in early Class II correction with cervical headgear. Angle Orthod 2007;77:960-7. https://doi.org/10.2319/092106-384
  24. Egolf RJ, BeGole EA, Upshaw HS. Factors associated with orthodontic patient compliance with intraoral elastic and headgear wear. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1990;97:336-48. https://doi.org/10.1016/0889-5406(90)70106-M
  25. Brandao M, Pinho HS, Urias D. Clinical and quantitative assessment of headgear compliance: a pilot study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2006; 129:239-44. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2005.08.035
  26. Yu IJ, Kook YA, Sung SJ, Lee KJ, Chun YS, Mo SS. Comparison of tooth displacement between buccal mini-implants and palatal plate anchorage for molar distalization: a finite element study. Eur J Orthod 2014;36:394-402. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjr130
  27. Kang JM, Park JH, Bayome M, Oh M, Park CO, Kook YA, et al. A three-dimensional finite element analysis of molar distalization with a palatal plate, pendulum, and headgear according to molar eruption stage. Korean J Orthod 2016;46:290-300. https://doi.org/10.4041/kjod.2016.46.5.290

Cited by

  1. Clinical applications and treatment outcomes with modified C-palatal plates vol.24, pp.1, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1053/j.sodo.2018.01.005
  2. Review of maxillary molar distalising appliances with palatal anchorage on miniimplants vol.14, pp.4, 2018, https://doi.org/10.5604/01.3001.0012.9892
  3. Review of maxillary molar distalising appliances with palatal anchorage on miniimplants vol.14, pp.4, 2018, https://doi.org/10.5604/01.3001.0012.9892
  4. Finite Element Analysis of Stress in Maxillary Dentition during En-masse Retraction with Implant Anchorage vol.60, pp.1, 2017, https://doi.org/10.2209/tdcpublication.2017-0055
  5. Displacement of mandibular dentition during total arch distalization according to locations and types of TSADs: 3D Finite element analysis vol.22, pp.1, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1111/ocr.12256
  6. Total arch distalization with interproximal stripping in a patient with severe crowding vol.49, pp.3, 2019, https://doi.org/10.4041/kjod.2019.49.3.194
  7. Comparison of Treatment Effects with Modified C-Palatal Plates vs Greenfield Molar Distalizer Appliances in Adolescents vol.44, pp.3, 2020, https://doi.org/10.17796/1053-4625-44.3.12
  8. Characteristics and Dynamics of Full Arch Distalization Using Transpalatal Arches with Midpalatal and Interradicular Miniscrews as Temporary Anchorage Devices: A Preliminary Finite Element Analysis vol.2020, pp.None, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1155/2020/6648526
  9. Dental and skeletal effects after total arch distalization using modified C-palatal plate on hypo- and hyperdivergent Class II malocclusions in adolescents vol.91, pp.1, 2021, https://doi.org/10.2319/031720-188.1
  10. Palatal temporary skeletal anchorage devices (TSADs): What to know and how to do? vol.24, pp.suppl, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1111/ocr.12451
  11. Evaluation of the Nasolabial Angle in Orthodontic Diagnosis: A Systematic Review vol.11, pp.6, 2021, https://doi.org/10.3390/app11062531
  12. Total maxillary arch distalization by using headgear in an adult patient: vol.91, pp.2, 2017, https://doi.org/10.2319/010320-857.1
  13. Distalization in Orthodontics: A Review and Case Series vol.2021, pp.None, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/8843959