Journal of the korean academy of Pediatric Dentistry (대한소아치과학회지)

Korean Academy of Pediatric Dentistry (대한소아치과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

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

Bonded expander 형태에 따른 facemask의 치료 효과 비교연구

  • 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)
  • 이은하 (성균관대학교 의과대학 삼성서울병원 치과진료부 소아치과) ;
  • 박기태 (성균관대학교 의과대학 삼성서울병원 치과진료부 소아치과)
  • Received : 2014.08.14
  • Accepted : 2014.10.07
  • Published : 2014.11.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

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.

본 연구의 목적은 3급 부정교합 환자에서 facemask 치료 시 bonded expander의 치아 피개 정도에 따라 facemask의 치료 효과를 비교하고, 구강 내 장치로서의 고정원 소실 정도를 평가하는 것이다. 초기 혼합치열기에 facemask 치료를 받은 18명의 환자를 대상으로, bonded expander의 피개 범위에 따라 제1군(4개 치아 피개, 9명)과 제2군(3개 치아 피개, 9명)으로 분류하였다. 치료 전과 후 측모두부방사선사진을 촬영하여 계측치를 비교하였다. Facemask 치료 후 두 군 모두 상악 전방이동 및 하악 후하방 회전의 골격적 효과가 관찰되었고, 두 군간에 유의한 차이는 없었다. 고정원 소실로서 두 군 모두 상악 구치의 근심이동이 관찰되었고, 제2군이 제1군에 비해 유의하게 큰 근심이동이 관찰되었다. 결론적으로 bonded expander의 치아 피개 범위에 따라 골격적 치료 효과에는 유의한 차이가 없었으나, 고정원으로서의 소실 정도에는 차이가 있었다.

Keywords

References

  1. Mouakeh M : Cephalometric evaluation of craniofacial pattern of Syrian children with Class III malocclusion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 119:640-649, 2001. https://doi.org/10.1067/mod.2001.112671
  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. https://doi.org/10.1016/0278-2391(84)90109-5
  5. 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.
  6. McNamara JA, Jr. : An orthopedic approach to the treatment of Class III malocclusion in young patients. J Clin Orthod, 21:598-608, 1987.
  7. 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2005.04.030
  8. 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2009.06.039
  9. Geron S, Shpack N, Kandos S, et al. : Anchorage loss-a multifactorial response. Angle Orthod, 73:730-737, 2003.
  10. Baik HS : Clinical results of the maxillary protraction in Korean children. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 108:583-592, 1995. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-5406(95)70003-X
  11. 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-5406(99)70298-2
  12. 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-5406(98)70292-6
  13. 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0889-5406(98)70306-3
  14. 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. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.sodo.2007.05.003
  15. 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. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.ejo.a036010
  16. 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. https://doi.org/10.2319/090811-584.1
  17. 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2007.06.011