• The korean journal of orthodontics
• /
• v.45 no.4
• /
• pp.209-214
• /
• 2015

Maxillary protraction is the conventional treatment for growing Class III patients with maxillary deficiency, but it has undesirable dental effects. The purpose of this report is to introduce an alternative modality of maxillary protraction in patients with dentoskeletal Class III malocclusion using a modified C-palatal plate connected with elastics to a face mask. This method improved skeletal measurements, corrected overjet, and slightly improved the profile. The patients may require definitive treatment in adolescence or adulthood. The modified C-palatal plate enables nonsurgical maxillary advancement with maximal skeletal effects and minimal dental side effects.

• The korean journal of orthodontics
• /
• v.50 no.1
• /
• pp.52-62
• /
• 2020

This case report presents the orthodontic treatment of a 25-year-old patient with skeletal Class II and severe maxillary arch crowding, moderate mandibular arch crowding, anterior crossbite, and a missing lower incisor. He was treated with molar distalization using a modified C-palatal plate and temporary anchorage devices to create sufficient space for retraction. The total treatment duration was 21 months. After treatment, his occlusion and smile esthetics showed significant improvement. The modified C-palatal plate represents a treatment modality that enhances the prospects of non-extraction treatment and reduces the need for extraction.

• The korean journal of orthodontics
• /
• v.48 no.4
• /
• pp.224-235
• /
• 2018

Objective: The purpose of this study was to compare the skeletal, dental, and soft-tissue treatment effects of nonextraction therapy using the modified C-palatal plate (MCPP) to those of premolar extraction (PE) treatment in adult patients with Class II malocclusion. Methods: Pretreatment and posttreatment lateral cephalographs of 40 adult patients with Class II malocclusion were retrospectively analyzed. The MCPP group comprised 20 patients treated with total arch distalization of the maxillary arch while the PE group comprised 20 patients treated with four PE. Fifty-eight linear and angular measurements were analyzed to assess the changes before and after treatment. Descriptive statistics, paired t-test, and multivariate analysis of variance were performed to evaluate the treatment effects within and between the two groups. Results: The MCPP group presented 3.4 mm of retraction, 1.0 mm of extrusion, and $7.3^{\circ}$ lingual inclination of the maxillary central incisor. In comparison, the PE group displayed greater amount of maxillary central incisor retraction and retroclination, mandibular incisor retraction, and upper lip retraction (5.3 mm, $14.8^{\circ}$, 5.1 mm, and 2.0 mm, respectively; p < 0.001 for all). In addition, the MCPP group showed 4.0 mm of distalization and 1.3 mm of intrusion with $2.9^{\circ}$ distal tipping of the maxillary first molars. Conclusions: These findings suggest the MCPP is an effective distalization appliance in the maxillary arch. The amount of incisor retraction, however, was significantly higher in the PE group. Therefore, four PE may be recommended when greater improvement of incisor position and soft-tissue profile is required.

• The korean journal of orthodontics
• /
• v.47 no.6
• /
• pp.375-383
• /
• 2017

Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the dental and skeletal effects of the modified C-palatal plate (MCPP) for total arch distalization in adult patients with Class II malocclusion and compare the findings with those of cervical pull headgear. Methods: The study sample consisted of the lateral cephalograms of 44 adult patients with Class II Division 1 malocclusion, including 22 who received treatment with MCPP (age, $24.7{\pm}7.7years$) and 22 who received treatment with cervical pull headgear (age, $23.0{\pm}7.7years$). Pre- (T1) and post-treatment (T2) cephalograms were analyzed for 24 linear and angular measurements. Multivariate analysis of variance was performed to evaluate the changes after treatment in each group and differences in treatment effects between the two groups. Results: The mean amount of distalization at the crown and root levels of the maxillary first molar and the amount of distal tipping was 4.2 mm, 3.5 mm, and $3.9^{\circ}$ in the MCPP group, and 2.3 mm, 0.6 mm, and $8.6^{\circ}$ in the headgear group, respectively. In addition, intrusion by 2.5 mm was observed in the MCPP group. In both groups, the distal movement of the upper lip and the increase in the nasolabial angle were statistically significant (p < 0.001). However, none of the skeletal and soft tissue variables exhibited significant differences between the two groups. Conclusions: The results of this study suggest that MCPP is an effective treatment modality for total arch distalization in adults.