Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.5933/JKAPD.2019.46.2.173

Analysis of Treatment Period on the Intraoral Removable Appliance Utilizing Vertical Facial Growth on Class III Malocclusion  

Song, Jihyeo (Department of Pediatric Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Yonsei University)
Kim, Seong-Oh (Department of Pediatric Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Yonsei University)
Song, Je Seon (Department of Pediatric Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Yonsei University)
Lee, Jaeho (Department of Pediatric Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Yonsei University)
Choi, Hyung-jun (Department of Pediatric Dentistry, College of Dentistry, Yonsei University)
Publication Information
Journal of the korean academy of Pediatric Dentistry / v.46, no.2, 2019 , pp. 173-182 More about this Journal
Abstract
Vertical facial growth triggers the rotation of mandible to move the chin point to the downward and backward direction, which showed remarkably effective result making the less prominent chin. Recently, the intraoral removable appliance utilizing class III elastic demonstrated the vertical growth trigger mechanism. The treatment change was very fast and wearing was quite easy, compared to extraoral appliances. The purpose of this study was to verify the duration of the treatment on class III malocclusion using intraoral removable appliances, which designed to accelerate vertical facial growth. 56 patients were selected with the complaint of the protruded mandible and class III malocclusion (overjet : -3 - 0 mm, overbite : 0 - 4 mm). Information like; age at start, duration of the treatment events, type of the treatment, overjet, overbite etc. was collected and calculated. The average age of the patients delivering the initial brace was $8.75{\pm}1.10year$. Most of the anterior crossbite was resolved within 6 months. The total treatment period was $21.79{\pm}10.73months$ with the additional procedures like the alignment of anterior teeth and torque control using additional removable and fixed orthodontic appliances. The correlation study showed that patient's cooperation (p = 0.000) and the use of fixed appliance (p = 0.032) were significantly influenced on treatment duration.
Keywords
Treatment of class III; Vertical facial growth; Intraoral removable appliance with class III hook;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 Hardy DK, Cubas YP, Orellana MF : Prevalence of angle class III malocclusion: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Open J Epidemiol, 2:75-82, 2012.   DOI
2 Toffol LD, Pavoni C, Cozza P, et al. : Orthopedic treatment outcomes in Class III malocclusion: a systematic review. Angle Orthod, 78:561-573, 2008.   DOI
3 McNamara JA Jr : A method of cephalometric evaluation. Am J Orthod, 86:449-469, 1984.   DOI
4 Choi A, Choi BJ, Kim SO, et al. : Anterior crossbite correction in primary dentition using intraoral appliance and class III elastic. J Korean Acad Pediatr Dent, 39:306-313, 2012.
5 Gomes AS, Lima EM : Mandibular growth during adolescence. Angle Orthod, 76:786-790, 2006.
6 Reyes BC, Baccetti T, McNamara JA Jr : An estimate of craniofacial growth in Class III malocclusion. Angle Orthod, 76:577-584, 2006.
7 Kuc-Michalska M, Baccetti T : Duration of the pubertal peak in skeletal Class I and Class III subjects. Angle Orthod, 80:54-57, 2010.   DOI
8 Jose Cherackal G, Thomas E, Prathap A : Combined Orthodontic and Surgical Approach in the Correction of a Class III Skeletal Malocclusion with Mandibular Prognathism and Vertical Maxillary Excess Using Bimaxillary Osteotomy. Case Rep Dent, 2013:797846, 2013.   DOI
9 Flieger R, Matys J, Dominiak M : The best time for orthodontic treatment for Polish children based on skeletal age analysis in accordance to refund policy of the Polish National Health Fund (NFZ). Adv Clin Exp Med, 27:1377-1382, 2018.   DOI
10 Cha KS : Skeletal changes of maxillary protraction in patients exhibiting skeletal class III malocclusion: a comparison of three skeletal maturation groups. Angle Orthod, 73:26-35, 2003.
11 Wendl B, Muchitsch AP, Wendl T, et al. : Retrospective 25-year follow-up of treatment outcomes in angle Class III patients: early versus late treatment. J Orofac Orthop, 78:201-210, 2017.   DOI
12 Baccetti T, Reyes BC, McNamara Jr JA : Craniofacial changes in Class III malocclusion as related to skeletal and dental maturation. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 132:171.e1-171.e12, 2007.   DOI
13 Baccetti T, Franchi L, McNamara JA Jr : Treatment and posttreatment craniofacial changes after rapid maxillary expansion and facemask therapy. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 118:404-413, 2000.   DOI
14 Bichara LM, Aragon ML, Brandao GA, Normando D : Factors influencing orthodontic treatment time for non-surgical Class III malocclusion. J Appl Oral Sci, 24:431-436, 2016.   DOI
15 Borrie F, Bearn D : Early correction of anterior crossbites: a systematic review. J Orthod, 38:175-184, 2011.   DOI
16 Wiedel AP, Bondemark L : Fixed versus removable orthodontic appliances to correct anterior crossbite in the mixed dentition-a randomized controlled trial. Eur J Orthod, 37:123-127, 2015.   DOI
17 Gu Y, Rabie AB, Hagg U : Treatment effects of simple fixed appliance and reverse headgear in correction of anterior crossbites. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 117:691-699, 2000.   DOI
18 Rabie AB, Gu Y : Management of pseudo Class III malocclusion in southern Chinese children. Br Dent J, 186:183-187, 1999.   DOI
19 Skidmore KJ, Brook KJ, Thomson WM, Harding WJ : Factors influencing treatment time in orthodontic patients. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 129:230-238, 2006.   DOI
20 Popowich K, Nebbe B, Major PW, et al. : Predictors for Class II treatment duration. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 127:293-300, 2005.   DOI
21 Fisher MA, Wenger RM, Hans MG : Pretreatment characteristics associated with orthodontic treatment duration. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 137:178-186, 2010.   DOI