Article Sidebar
Views pdf: 52
OUTCOMES OF TREATMENT CLASS III SKELETAL MALOCCLUSION USING FACEMASK THERAPY WITH RAPID MAXILLARY EXPANSION
Main Article Content
Abstract
Objectives: Evaluate the changes in teeth, skeletal and soft tissues on lateral cephalometric radiographs in Class III skeletal patients treated with facemask combined with rapid maxillary expansion (RME). Methods: The study involved 15 patients (11 males and 4 females) aged 7-11 years diagnosed with Class III skeletal due to maxillary deficiency, treated at the Ho Chi Minh National Oral and Maxillofacial Hospital. Results: The maxilla moved forward by 1 mm (p<0,05), while the mandible rotated downward and backward, causing point B to move down by 4 mm and back by 4.83 mm (p<0.05). These changes improved the maxilla-mandible relationship, with the Wits appraisal increasing by 3.98 mm and the ANB angle increasing by 4 degrees (p<0.05). Dental analysis showed the upper incisors extruded by 1.5 mm and moved forward by 1.29 mm (p<0.05), but the inclination relative to the cranial base did not change significantly (p>0.05). Dental relationships changed with overjet increasing by 6.51 mm (p<0.05), and facial aesthetics improved with the N-A-Pog angle increasing by 8 degrees, upper lip protrusion increasing by 1.6 mm, and lower lip protrusion decreasing by 0.64 mm. Conclusion: Treatment of Class III skeletal with facemask therapy combined with RME improves skeletal relationships and facial aesthetics with minimal outward inclination of the upper incisors
Article Details
Keywords
facemask therapy, rapid maxillary expansion, class III malocclusion
References
2. Ellis E., 3rd, McNamara J. A., Jr. Components of adult Class III malocclusion. Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery: official journal of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons. May 1984;42(5):295-305.
3. Foersch M., Jacobs C., Wriedt S., Hechtner M., Wehrbein H. Effectiveness of maxillary protraction using facemask with or without maxillary expansion: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clinical oral investigations. Jul 2015;19(6):1181-92.
4. Baccetti Tiziano, Reyes Brian C, McNamara Jr James A. Gender differences in Class III malocclusion. The Angle orthodontist. 2005;75(4):510-520
5. Kayafoğlu Göksu Emek, Esenlik Elçin. Comparison of Rapid Maxillary Expansion and Alternate Rapid Maxillary Expansion and Constriction Protocols with Face Mask Therapy. Turkish Journal of Orthodontics. 2023;36(4):231.
6. Liu Weitao, Zhou Yanheng, Wang Xuedong, Liu Dawei, Zhou Shaonan. Effect of maxillary protraction with alternating rapid palatal expansion and constriction vs expansion alone in maxillary retrusive patients: a single-center, randomized controlled trial. American Journal of Orthodontics Dentofacial Orthopedics. 2015; 148(4):641-651.
7. Ozbilen Elvan Onem, Yilmaz Hanife Nuray, Kucukkeles Nazan. Comparison of the effects of rapid maxillary expansion and alternate rapid maxillary expansion and constriction protocols followed by facemask therapy. The Korean Journal of Orthodontics. 2019;49(1):49-58
8. Rutili Valentina, Souki Bernardo Quiroga, Nieri Michele, et al. Long‐term effects produced by early treatment of Class III malocclusion with rapid maxillary expansion and facemask followed by fixed appliances: A multicentre retro‐prospective controlled study. Orthodontics Craniofacial Research. 2024;27(3):429-438