New treatment modality for maxillary hypoplasia in cleft patients Protraction facemask with miniplate anchorage

被引:33
作者
Baek, Seung-Hak [2 ]
Kim, Keun-Woo
Choi, Jin-Young [1 ]
机构
[1] Seoul Natl Univ, Dept Oral & Maxillofacial Surg, Sch Dent, Dent Res Inst, Seoul 110768, South Korea
[2] Seoul Natl Univ, Dept Orthodont, Sch Dent, Dent Res Inst, Seoul 110768, South Korea
关键词
Maxillary protraction; Facemask; Miniplate; CLASS-III MALOCCLUSION; MASK THERAPY; ORTHOPEDIC PROTRACTION; SKELETAL ANCHORAGE; PALATAL EXPANSION; DENTAL CHANGES; LIP; CHILDREN; AGE;
D O I
10.2319/073009-435.1
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
Objective: To present cleft patients treated with protraction facemask and miniplate anchorage (FM/MP) in order to demonstrate the effects of FM/MP on maxillary hypoplasia. Materials and Methods: The cases consisted of cleft palate only (12 year 1 month old girl, treatment duration = 16 months), unilateral cleft lip and alveolus (12 year 1 month old boy, treatment duration = 24 months), and unilateral cleft lip and palate (7 year 2 month old boy, treatment duration = 13 months). Curvilinear type surgical miniplates (Martin, Tuttlinger, Germany) were placed into the zygomatic buttress areas of the maxilla. After 4 weeks, mobility of the miniplates was checked, and the orthopedic force (500 g per side, 30 degrees downward and forward from the occlusal plane) was applied 12 to 14 hours per day. Results: In all cases, there was significant forward displacement of the point A. Side effects such as labial tipping of the upper incisors, extrusion of the upper molars, clockwise rotations of the mandibular plane, and bite opening, were considered minimal relative to that usually observed with conventional protraction facemask with tooth-borne anchorage. Conclusions: FM/MP can be an effective alternative treatment modality for maxillary hypoplasia with minimal unwanted side effects in cleft patients. (Angle Orthod. 2010;80:783-791.)
引用
收藏
页码:783 / 791
页数:9
相关论文
共 41 条
[1]   Comparison of treatment outcome and stability between distraction osteogenesis and LeFort I osteotomy in cleft patients with maxillary hypoplasia [J].
Baek, Seung-Hak ;
Lee, Jin-Kyung ;
Lee, Jong-Ho ;
Kim, Myung-Jin ;
Kim, Jong-Ryoul .
JOURNAL OF CRANIOFACIAL SURGERY, 2007, 18 (05) :1209-1215
[2]   Cleft type and Angle's classification of malocclusion in Korean cleft patients [J].
Baek, SH ;
Moon, HS ;
Yang, WS .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF ORTHODONTICS, 2002, 24 (06) :647-653
[4]  
BUSCHANG PH, 1994, ANGLE ORTHOD, V64, P145
[5]  
CHA BK, 2007, KOREAN J ORTHOD, V37, P73
[6]  
Cha KS, 2003, ANGLE ORTHOD, V73, P26
[7]  
Da Silva Filho Omar Gabriel, 2003, J Clin Orthod, V37, P315
[8]   Maxillary development revisited: Relevance to the orthopaedic treatment of Class III malocclusions [J].
Delaire, J .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF ORTHODONTICS, 1997, 19 (03) :289-311
[9]   Facemask therapy with rigid anchorage in a patient with maxillary hypoplasia and severe oligodontia [J].
Enacar, A ;
Giray, B ;
Pehlivanoglu, M ;
Iplikcioglu, H .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ORTHODONTICS AND DENTOFACIAL ORTHOPEDICS, 2003, 123 (05) :571-577
[10]   Postpubertal assessment of treatment timing for maxillary expansion and protraction therapy followed by fixed appliances [J].
Franchi, L ;
Baccetti, T ;
McNamara, JA .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF ORTHODONTICS AND DENTOFACIAL ORTHOPEDICS, 2004, 126 (05) :555-568