• 대한치과교정학회지
• /
• 제22권3호
• /
• pp.509-529
• /
• 1992

Skeletal Class III malocclusion is one of the most difficult type to treat and stabilize. For a child with developing skeletal Class III malocclusion, the treatment objective would be to stimulate maxillary growth, particulary one who has markedly deficient maxilla, and to restrain excessive mandibular growth. In order to stimulate the maxillary growth, maxillary protraction appliance is the one of the effective orthopedic appliances in skeletal Class III. The purposes of this study were as follows ; evaluation of the skeletal and dental changes of the maxillary protraction in children with Class III Maxillary deficiency , comparison of the clinical effects between the group with RPE and labiolingual intraoral appliances , comparison of the clinical effects and stability related to the ages of the patients : stability of the maxillary protraction about 1 year after retention. The subjects consisted of 60 children between the ages of 8 and 13.4 who were diagnosed as Class III with maxillary deficiency and were treated with Face Mask (Delaire Type) from the Dept. of Orthodontics Yong Dong Severance Hospital, Yonsei University. 48 children wore the RPE and 12 children wore Labiolingual Appliance. Lateral Cephalograms were taken for each patient at before and after correction of anterior cross-bite in 60 children, and after an observation period of 10 to 14 months in 19 children. X and Y coordinate of 10 landmarks were analyzed using a horizontal line through sella and rotated $6^{\circ}$ down anteriorly as the horizontal reference axis, and a perpendicular verticual line through sella as the vertical reference axis. Each of the 31 measurents (10 verticals, 10 horizontals, 2 angles and 9 others) was statistically analyzed using SPSS/PC statistics. The results are as follows; 1. After maxillary protraction the maxilla and maxillary teeth moved downward and forward, while the mandible and mandibular incisor rotated downward and backward. 2. Maxillary protraction with rapid palatal expansion appliance was more effective than with labiolingual appliance. 3. More downward movement of the posterior palatal plane obserbed with maxillary protraction doing the midpalatal suture opening than with protraction after finishing the palatal expansion 4. The clinical effects of protraction and changes of the retention periods were not statistically significant among the age groups. 5. During the retention period, maxilla and maxillary teeth, and mandible and mandibular teeth moved downward and forward, however the mandibular changes were larger than the maxillary changes.

• 대한치과교정학회지
• /
• 제24권4호
• /
• pp.851-860
• /
• 1994

Before 1970, mandibular overgrowth was known as main cause of skeletal Class III malocclusion in growing children ; however, recent study reports that many skeletal Class III malocclusion patients also show maxillary deficiency. Since 1972, when Delaire re-accommodated Protraction Head Gear (P.H.G.), many researchers have reported that skeletal Class III discrepancies could be corrected through use of P.H.G., which induces anterior movement of maxilla and change in mandibular growth pattern into infero-posterior direction ; nevertheless, it is very difficult to predict resultant changes of orofacial region. The purpose of this study was to find out what treatment effect P.H.G. has on different study samples. Author divided 51 skeletal Class III malocclusion patients with maxillary deficiency who were treated with P.H.G. into different study groups depending on sex, treatment beginning age, intraoral appliance, and facial growth pattern. By doing so, following results were obtained. 1. Treatment beginning age and Sex Four age groups (5.8 to 8 year-old, 8 to 10 year-old, 10 to 12 year-old, 12 to 14 year-old) were compared, and no significant difference was observed. (p<0.05) There was no significant difference between the sex groups, either. (p<0.05). 2. Intraoral appliance Treatment effects of study groups that used R.P.E.(mean age of 10.2) and Labio-Lingual appliance(mean age of 8.9) were compared. There was no significant difference depending on the type of intraoral appliance that was used. (p<0.05) 3. Facial growth pattern 1) Amounts of SNB and ANB corrections were smaller in clockwise growth pattern group than those in normal or counterclockwise growth pattern group. (p<0.05) 2) Amounts of increase in Wits appraisal and mandibular plane angle were greater in counterclockwise growth pattern group than those in normal or clockwise growth pattern group. (p<0.05) 3)Amounts of increase in articular angle were greater in counter lockwise growth pattern group than those in clockwise growth pattern group. (p<0.05)