• The korean journal of orthodontics
• /
• v.53 no.1
• /
• pp.54-64
• /
• 2023

This case report describes skeletal anchorage-supported maxillary protraction performed with the Alternate Rapid Maxillary Expansion and Constriction (AltRAMEC) protocol over a treatment duration of 14 months in a 16-year-old female patient who was in the late growth-development period. Miniplates were applied to the patient's aperture piriformis area to apply force from the protraction appliance. After 9 weeks of following the Alt-RAMEC protocol, miniplates were used to transfer a unilateral 500-g protraction force to a Petit-type face mask. A significant improvement was observed in the soft tissue profile in measurements made both cephalometrically and in three dimensional photographs. Subsequently, the second phase of fixed orthodontic treatment was started and the treatment was completed with the retention phase. Following treatment completion, occlusion, smile esthetics, and soft tissue profile improved significantly in response to orthopedic and orthodontic treatment.

• The korean journal of orthodontics
• /
• v.49 no.1
• /
• pp.49-58
• /
• 2019

Objective: The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate and compare the changes in the pharyngeal airway (PA), maxillary sinus volume, and skeletal parameters after rapid maxillary expansion (RME) and alternate rapid maxillary expansion and constriction (Alt-RAMEC) followed by facemask (FM) therapy. Methods: The records of 40 patients with skeletal Class III malocclusion due to maxillary retrognathism were collected, and the patients were assigned into two groups. The first group comprised 8 male and 12 female patients (mean age, $10.0{\pm}1.1years$) treated using RME/FM for an average of 10 months. The second group comprised 10 male and 10 female patients (mean age, $9.64{\pm}1.3years$) treated using Alt-RAMEC/FM for an average of 12 months. Cone-beam computed tomography images acquired before (T0) and after treatment (T1) were evaluated. Results: Regarding the skeletal effects, significant differences between the groups were the increase in ANS-HRP (perpendicular distance of ANS to the horizontal reference plane, 0.99 mm, p <0.05) in the Alt-RAMEC/FM group and the decrease in PP-SN (palatal plane to Sella-Nasion plane, $0.93^{\circ}$, p < 0.05) in the RME/FM group. Maxillary sinus volumes increased significantly in both the groups, and the increase was statistically significantly higher in the Alt-RAMEC/FM group. Although no significant intergroup differences were observed in PA volumes, both lower ($1,011.19mm^3$) and total ($1,601.21mm^3$), PA volume increased significantly in the Alt-RAMEC/FM group. Conclusions: The different expansion devices and protocols used with FM therapy do not seem to affect the forward movement of the maxilla and PA volumes. In contrast, the increase in maxillary sinus volume was greater in the Alt-RAMEC/FM protocol.

• The korean journal of orthodontics
• /
• v.53 no.3
• /
• pp.175-184
• /
• 2023

Objective: To evaluate and compare a series of volume changes in the nasal cavity (NC), nasopharynx, oropharynx, and maxillary sinuses (MS) in growing Class III patients after either rapid palatal expansion (RPE) or alternate rapid maxillary expansion and constriction (Alt-RAMEC) followed by facemask (FM) therapy, by using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). Methods: Forty growing Class III patients were retrospectively selected and divided into two matched groups: RPE/FM (14 females, 6 males; mean age, 9.66 ± 1.23 years) and Alt-RAMEC/FM groups (14 females, 6 males; mean age, 10.28 ± 1.45 years). The anteroposterior and vertical displacements of Point A, the volumes of the NC, nasopharyngeal, oropharyngeal, and MS were measured at different time points: pretreatment (T1), postexpansion (T2), and postprotraction (T3). Results: Both groups demonstrated significant maxilla advancement (by 1.3 mm) during expansion, with a statistically significant intergroup difference during protraction (RPE/FM, 1.1 mm; Alt-RAMEC/FM, 2.4 mm; p < 0.05) and throughout the treatment (RPE/FM, 2.4 mm; Alt-RAMEC/FM, 3.7 mm; p < 0.05). NC and nasopharyngeal airway volumes increased significantly in both groups after expansion, protraction, and treatment. The oropharyngeal and MS volumes increased in both groups after protraction and post-treatment. However, no volumetric differences were observed between the two groups. Conclusions: There was no significant difference in airway volume changes, including NC, nasopharyngeal, oropharyngeal airway, and MS, between RPE/FM and Alt-RAMEC/FM groups at different time points. Although there was significantly more forward movement after protraction in the Alt-RAMEC/FM group, the difference was deemed too small to be clinically relevant.