Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.5933/JKAPD.2014.41.4.298

A Comparative Study of Facemask Therapy with Two Types of Bonded Expander  

Lee, Eunha (Department of Pediatric Dentistry, The Institute of Oral Health Science, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine)
Park, Kitae (Department of Pediatric Dentistry, The Institute of Oral Health Science, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine)
Publication Information
Journal of the korean academy of Pediatric Dentistry / v.41, no.4, 2014 , pp. 298-305 More about this Journal
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effects of facemask therapy in patients with Class III malocclusion with two types of bonded expanders covering different numbers of anchored teeth and to compare the anchorage value of two types of bonded expander. Eighteen subjects with Class III malocclusion in early mixed dentition were included in this study, and subjects were divided into two groups based on the number of teeth covered by bonded expander: group 1 (splinting four teeth on each side, 9 subjects) and group 2 (splinting three teeth on each side, 9 subjects). Lateral cephalograms were obtained and assessed before (T1) and after (T2) the treatment. The facemask therapy showed skeletal effects including anterior movement of maxilla and backward rotation of mandible in both groups, with no significant differences between groups. Mesial movement of maxillary molars which indicates anchorage loss of the bonded expander was found in both groups, but significantly larger mesial movement was found in group 2 than in group 1. In conclusion, the value of anchorage was different according to the number of teeth covered by bonded expander as an intraoral anchorage of facemask, but there were no significant differences in skeletal effects.
Keywords
Facemask; Bonded expander; Intraoral anchorage; Class III malocclusion;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Mouakeh M : Cephalometric evaluation of craniofacial pattern of Syrian children with Class III malocclusion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 119:640-649, 2001.   DOI   ScienceOn
2 van Vuuren C : A review of the literature on the prevalence of Class III malocclusion and the mandibular prognathic growth hypotheses. Aust Orthod J, 12:23-28, 1991.
3 Thilander B, Myrberg N : The prevalence of malocclusion in Swedish schoolchildren. Scand J Dent Res, 81:12-21, 1973.
4 Ellis E, 3rd, McNamara JA, Jr. : Components of adult Class III malocclusion. J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 42:295-305, 1984.   DOI   ScienceOn
5 McNamara JA, Jr. : An orthopedic approach to the treatment of Class III malocclusion in young patients. J Clin Orthod, 21:598-608, 1987.
6 Vaughn GA, Mason B, Moon HB, et al. : The effects of maxillary protraction therapy with or without rapid palatal expansion: a prospective, randomized clinical trial. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 128:299-309, 2005.   DOI
7 Sar C, Arman-Ozcirpici A, Uckan S, et al. : Comparative evaluation of maxillary protraction with or without skeletal anchorage. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 139:636-649, 2011.   DOI
8 Geron S, Shpack N, Kandos S, et al. : Anchorage loss-a multifactorial response. Angle Orthod, 73:730-737, 2003.
9 Baik HS : Clinical results of the maxillary protraction in Korean children. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 108:583-592, 1995.   DOI   ScienceOn
10 Macdonald KE, Kapust AJ, Turley PK : Cephalometric changes after the correction of class III malocclusion with maxillary expansion/facemask therapy. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 116:13-24, 1999.   DOI   ScienceOn
11 da Silva Filho OG, Magro AC, Capelozza Filho L : Early treatment of the Class III malocclusion with rapid maxillary expansion and maxillary protraction. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 113:196-203, 1998.   DOI
12 Baccetti T, McGill JS, Franchi L, et al. : Skeletal effects of early treatment of Class III malocclusion with maxillary expansion and face-mask therapy. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 113:333-343, 1998.   DOI   ScienceOn
13 Ngan P, Cheung E, Wei SHY : Comparison of Protraction Facemask Response Using Banded and Bonded Expansion Appliances as Anchorage. Semi Orthod, 13:175-185, 2007.   DOI
14 Tanne K, Hiraga J, Sakuda M : Effects of directions of maxillary protraction forces on biomechanical changes in craniofacial complex. Eur J Orthod, 11:382-391, 1989.   DOI
15 Lee NK, Yang IH, Baek SH : The short-term treatment effects of face mask therapy in Class III patients based on the anchorage device: miniplates vs rapid maxillary expansion. Angle Orthod, 82:846-852, 2012.   DOI
16 Kircelli BH, Pektas ZO : Midfacial protraction with skeletally anchored face mask therapy: a novel approach and preliminary results. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 133:440-449, 2008.   DOI
17 Guyer EC, Ellis EE, 3rd, McNamara JA, Jr., et al. : Components of class III malocclusion in juveniles and adolescents. Angle Orthod, 56:7-30, 1986.