Effects of eruption guidance appliance in the early treatment of Class III malocclusion.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the dentoskeletal effects and effectiveness of the eruption guidance appliance in Class III patients in the mixed dentition. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The experimental group comprised 22 patients with Class III malocclusion and anterior cross-bite (12 males, 10 females, mean age 7.63 ± 0.96 years) treated with the eruption guidance appliance over a mean period of 1.72 ± 0.48 years. The control group comprised 22 untreated subjects (12 males, 10 females, mean age 7.21 ± 0.60 years) with Class III malocclusion. Lateral cephalometric radiographs were obtained at pretreatment (T1) and posttreatment (T2). Intergroup comparisons were performed with Mann-Whitney and t-tests (P < .05). RESULTS: In the experimental and control groups, the anteroposterior relationship between the maxilla and mandible (ANB angle) remained stable during the treatment period (T1 to T2). The mandibular plane angle decreased in the experimental group and increased in the control group. In the experimental group, the lower anterior face height increase and maxillary molar vertical development were significantly smaller compared to controls. Positive overjet was achieved in 54% of the experimental group. CONCLUSIONS: The eruption guidance appliance produced no change in the skeletal anteroposterior relationship. The anterior cross-bite/edge-to-edge relationship was corrected in only about half of the treated subjects.

Orthodontic treatment for prominent lower front teeth (Class III malocclusion) in children.

BACKGROUND: Prominent lower front teeth (Class III malocclusion) may be due to jaw or tooth position or both. The upper jaw (maxilla) can be too far back or the lower jaw (mandible) too far forward; the upper front teeth (incisors) may be tipped back or the lower front teeth tipped forwards. Orthodontic treatment uses different types of braces (appliances) fitted inside or outside the mouth (or both) and fixed to the teeth. A facemask is the most commonly reported non-surgical intervention used to correct Class III malocclusion. The facemask rests on the forehead and chin, and is connected to the upper teeth via an expansion appliance (known as 'rapid maxillary expansion' (RME)). Using elastic bands placed by the wearer, a force is applied to the top teeth and jaw to pull them forwards and downward. Some orthodontic interventions involve a surgical component; these go through the gum into the bone (e.g. miniplates). In severe cases, or if orthodontic treatment is unsuccessful, people may need jaw (orthognathic) surgery as adults. This review updates one published in 2013. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of orthodontic treatment for prominent lower front teeth in children and adolescents. SEARCH METHODS: An information specialist searched four bibliographic databases and two trial registries up to 16 January 2023. Review authors screened reference lists. SELECTION CRITERIA: We looked for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) involving children and adolescents (16 years of age or under) randomised to receive orthodontic treatment to correct prominent lower front teeth (Class III malocclusion), or no (or delayed) treatment. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Our primary outcome was overjet (i.e. prominence of the lower front teeth); our secondary outcomes included ANB (A point, nasion, B point) angle (which measures the relative position of the maxilla to the mandible). MAIN RESULTS: We identified 29 RCTs that randomised 1169 children (1102 analysed). The children were five to 13 years old at the start of treatment. Most studies measured outcomes directly after treatment; only one study provided long-term follow-up. All studies were at high risk of bias as participant and personnel blinding was not possible. Non-surgical orthodontic treatment versus untreated control We found moderate-certainty evidence that non-surgical orthodontic treatments provided a substantial improvement in overjet (mean difference (MD) 5.03 mm, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.81 to 6.25; 4 studies, 184 participants) and ANB (MD 3.05°, 95% CI 2.40 to 3.71; 8 studies, 345 participants), compared to an untreated control group, when measured immediately after treatment. There was high heterogeneity in the analyses, but the effects were consistently in favour of the orthodontic treatment groups rather than the untreated control groups (studies tested facemask (with or without RME), chin cup, orthodontic removable traction appliance, tandem traction bow appliance, reverse Twin Block with lip pads and RME, Reverse Forsus and mandibular headgear). Longer-term outcomes were measured in only one study, which evaluated facemask. It presented low-certainty evidence that improvements in overjet and ANB were smaller at 3-year follow-up than just after treatment (overjet MD 2.5 mm, 95% CI 1.21 to 3.79; ANB MD 1.4°, 95% CI 0.43 to 2.37; 63 participants), and were not found at 6-year follow-up (overjet MD 1.30 mm, 95% CI -0.16 to 2.76; ANB MD 0.7°, 95% CI -0.74 to 2.14; 65 participants). In the same study, at the 6-year follow-up, clinicians made an assessment of whether surgical correction of participants' jaw position was likely to be needed in the future. A perceived need for surgical correction was observed more often in participants who had not received facemask treatment (odds ratio (OR) 3.34, 95% CI 1.21 to 9.24; 65 participants; low-certainty evidence). Surgical orthodontic treatment versus untreated control One study of 30 participants evaluated surgical miniplates, with facemask or Class III elastics, against no treatment, and found a substantial improvement in overjet (MD 7.96 mm, 95% CI 6.99 to 8.40) and ANB (MD 5.20°, 95% CI 4.48 to 5.92; 30 participants). However, the evidence was of low certainty, and there was no follow-up beyond the end of treatment. Facemask versus another non-surgical orthodontic treatment Eight studies compared facemask or modified facemask (with or without RME) to another non-surgical orthodontic treatment. Meta-analysis did not suggest that other treatments were superior; however, there was high heterogeneity, with mixed, uncertain findings (very low-certainty evidence). Facemask versus surgically-anchored appliance There may be no advantage of adding surgical anchorage to facemasks for ANB (MD -0.35, 95% CI -0.78 to 0.07; 4 studies, 143 participants; low-certainty evidence). The evidence for overjet was of very low certainty (MD -0.40 mm, 95% CI -1.30 to 0.50; 1 study, 43 participants). Facemask variations Adding RME to facemask treatment may have no additional benefit for ANB (MD -0.15°, 95% CI -0.94 to 0.64; 2 studies, 60 participants; low-certainty evidence). The evidence for overjet was of low certainty (MD 1.86 mm, 95% CI 0.39 to 3.33; 1 study, 31 participants). There may be no benefit in terms of effect on ANB of alternating rapid maxillary expansion and constriction compared to using expansion alone (MD -0.46°, 95% CI -1.03 to 0.10; 4 studies, 131 participants; low-certainty evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Moderate-certainty evidence showed that non-surgical orthodontic treatments (which included facemask, reverse Twin Block, orthodontic removable traction appliance, chin cup, tandem traction bow appliance and mandibular headgear) improved the bite and jaw relationship immediately post-treatment. Low-certainty evidence showed surgical orthodontic treatments were also effective. One study measured longer-term outcomes and found that the benefit from facemask was reduced three years after treatment, and appeared to be lost by six years. However, participants receiving facemask treatment were judged by clinicians to be less likely to need jaw surgery in adulthood. We have low confidence in these findings and more studies are required to reach reliable conclusions. Orthodontic treatment for Class III malocclusion can be invasive, expensive and time-consuming, so future trials should include measurement of adverse effects and patient satisfaction, and should last long enough to evaluate whether orthodontic treatment in childhood avoids the need for jaw surgery in adulthood.

A retrospective study evaluating the influence of Class III correction appliances on the sagittal pharyngeal airway dimension.

The aim of this study was to compare the effects of Class III correction appliances including the Facemask (FM), and the new non-compliance fixed functional appliances such as the Reversed Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device (FRD), as well as the CS-2000 (CS), on the sagittal pharyngeal airway dimension (SPAD). Pre-treatment and post-treatment lateral cephalograms of 45 patients who underwent Class III appliance treatment, using either FM, Reversed FRD, or CS were collected from the files of treated patients. SPAD changes were evaluated in each group, and comparisons were conducted between the three study groups. Additionally, sagittal and vertical skeletal measurements were conducted. The FM, the Reversed FRD, and the CS, were found to generate a significant increase in the SPAD, with the Reversed FRD contributing to the most significant change at the OPAA (116.80 ± 26.36 mm2). All three appliances elicited significant antero-posterior changes in the SNA°, SNB°, and ANB°, also with the greatest intermaxillary change documented with the employment of the Reversed FRD (ANB° = 3.33 ± 0.82°). As for the vertical dimension, the FM, the Reversed FRD, and the CS elicited significant FMA° increases, with the greatest change attributed to the FM (FMA° = 2.32 ± 0.97°). Therefore, the three tested Class III corrective appliances generated significant SPAD, antero-posterior, and vertical changes. However, the Revered FRD showed a superior impact in increasing the SPAD at the OPAA level and in eliciting significant intermaxillary changes.

Maxillofacial growth changes after maxillary protraction therapy in children with class III malocclusion: a dual control group retrospective study.

PURPOSE: To investigate the balance between post-treatment effect and continued nature growth after maxillary protraction treatment in patients with skeletal class III malocclusion. METHODS: 31 patients aged 8.79 ± 1.65 years with skeletal Class III malocclusion had been treated with maxillary protraction and the treatment lasted an average of 1.16 years. The average observation duration after treatment in the maxillary protraction group was 2.05 ± 0.39 years. In the control groups, a sample of 22 patients (9.64 ± 2.53 years) with untreated skeletal class III malocclusion and 24 patients (9.28 ± 0.96 years) with skeletal class I malocclusion were matched to the treatment group according to age, sex and observation period. The mean observation interval of the control groups was 2.39 ± 1.29 years in the class III group and 1.97 ± 0.49 years in the class I group. RESULTS: The active orthopedic treatment effect showed a opposite trend to the natural craniomaxillofacial growth effect after treatment in many aspects. In the observation duration of treatment group, decrease in ANB, Wits appraisal and BAr-AAr were statistically significant compared to class I control group (p < 0.001), and there was a significant increase in NA-FH (P < 0.001) which was contrary to class III control group. Treatment group presented a significant increase in Gn-Co (P < 0.01) and Co-Go (P < 0.001), except for changes in the extent of the mandibular base (Pog-Go, P = 0.149) compared to class I control group. The vertical maxillomandibular skeletal variables (Gonial; MP-SN; MP-FH; Y-axis) in treatment group decreased significantly compared to those in class III control group (P < 0.01). U1-SN and L1-MP showed a significant increase, which was similar to the class I group (P > 0.05), and overjet decreased significantly relative to both of the two control groups (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Maxillary protraction therapy led to stable outcomes in approximately 77.42% of children with Class III malocclusion approximately 2 years after treatment. Unfavorable skeletal changes were mainly due to the greater protrusion of the mandible but maxillary protraction did have a certain degree of postimpact on the mandibular base. Protraction therapy does not fundamentally change the mode of maxillary growth in Class III subjects except for the advancement of the maxilla. Craniomaxillofacial region tend to restabilize after treatment and lead to skeletal growth rotation and more dentoalveolar compensation.

A comparison of maxillary posterior changes following facemask therapy: Skeletal anchorage versus tooth-borne anchorage.

OBJECTIVE: To compare changes in the maxillary posterior structure as seen in cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) images resulting from facemask therapy using skeletal (miniplate/FM) anchorage versus tooth-borne anchorage (RME/FM). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted on 20 patients divided into the miniplate/FM group (nine patients aged 9.5 ± 1.4 years) and the RME/FM group (11 patients aged 9.2 ± 1.4 years). CBCT images before and after facemask therapy were evaluated to assess changes in the maxillary posterior structure. RESULTS: The miniplate/FM group had greater advancement of the maxilla and midface compared to the RME/FM group (p < .05). Specifically, there was about three times more advancement of the pterygomaxillary suture in the miniplate/FM group than in the RME/FM group (p < .05). Moreover, the advancement of the pterygomaxillary suture was about half the advancement of A point in the miniplate/FM group, while only about 25% in the RME/FM group. Finally, the miniplate/FM group showed an increase in the transverse dimension of the posterior and superior parts of the maxilla (p < .05). CONCLUSION: There was greater forward movement of the pterygomaxillary suture with facemask therapy using the skeletal anchorage compared to tooth-borne anchorage, leading to a more significant advancement of the maxilla and midface.

Tratamento da classe III com disjunção maxilar e tração reversa da maxila: relato de caso clínico / Class III treatment weth maxillary disjunction and reverse maxillary traction: clinical case report

Objetivo: A má oclusão classe III de Angle se caracteriza por protrusão mandibular, retrusão maxilar ou pela combinação de ambas. Além de prejudicar a estética facial do paciente, essa má oclusão pode causar alterações funcionais e respiratórias. Uma das alternativas de tratamento para esses casos é o uso da máscara de Petit e do aparelho disjuntor de Hyrax. Este estudo tem como objetivo avaliar por meio da cefalometria ortodôntica se o tratamento com expansão maxilar em conjunto com a tração reversa da maxila diminuem os agravos estéticos e funcionais do paciente Classe III. Relato de caso: o relato de caso descrito no presente trabalho é sobre uma paciente que foi submetida a esse tratamento, sendo descrito por meio de análises cefalométricas, exames radiográficos, fotos intrabucais e achados clínicos. Considerações finais: A verificação dos resultados obtidos após o término do tratamento mostrou que a paciente teve uma boa adesão ao uso desses aparelhos e obteve resultados satisfatórios na sua função mastigatória, na sua oclusão e na sua estética facial e dentária.(AU)

Objective: Angle class III malocclusion is characterized by mandibular protrusion, maxillary retrusion or a combination of both. In addition to impairing the patient's facial aesthetics, this malocclusion can cause functional and respiratory changes. One of the treatment alternatives for these cases is the use of the Petit mask and the Hyrax breaker device. This study aims to evaluate, through orthodontic cephalometry, whether the treatment with maxillary expansion in conjunction with the reverse traction of the maxilla reduces the aesthetic and functional problems of Class III patients. Case report: the case report described in the present work is about a patient who underwent this treatment, being described through cephalometric analysis, radiographic examinations, intraoral photos and clinical findings. Final considerations: The verification of the results obtained after the end of the treatment showed that the patient had a good adherence to the use of these devices and obtained satisfactory results in her masticatory function, in her occlusion and in her facial and dental aesthetics.(AU)

Assessment of influence of facemask treatment with skeletal anchorage on the temporomandibular joint using magnetic resonance imaging: a preliminary study.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to investigate the influence of facemask treatment with skeletal anchorage on the temporomandibular joint (TMJ) using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), in patients with Class III malocclusion, accompanied by maxillary retrusion. METHODS: Fifteen patients with a mean age of 12.1±1.43 years were included in the study. All patients were treated using facemask with skeletal anchorage after eight weeks of Alternate Rapid Maxillary Expansion and Constriction (Alt-RAMEC) protocol. Magnetic resonance imaging was performed before and immediately after facemask treatment for TMJ evaluation. Disc position, condylar translation, degenerative changes of the condyles, and joint effusion were evaluated. To assess whether the alterations associated with the treatment were statistically significant, McNemar and marginal homogeneity tests were used. RESULTS: After facemask treatment, a statistically significant change was observed in the disc position (an anterior disc displacement with/without reduction in five TMJs) (p<0.05). The alteration in the condylar translation was not statistically significant (p>0.05). This treatment did not cause degenerative changes of the condyles or effusion in any of the TMJs. CONCLUSION: Facemask treatment with skeletal anchorage following the Alt-RAMEC protocol had a minimal influence on the TMJ, only by means of disc position, which was not negligible. Long-term results of such treatment are required for following up the changes observed in the TMJs.

Dentofacial effects of miniscrew-anchored maxillary protraction on prepubertal children with maxillary deficiency: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The introduction of bone-anchored maxillary protraction eliminated the side effects of facemask in the early treatment of patients with maxillary retrusion. This study aimed to evaluate the effects of miniscrew-anchored maxillary protraction (MAMP) and compare them with the growth changes in an untreated control group in growing patients with Class III malocclusion. METHODS: Forty growing patients with Class III malocclusion and retrognathic maxilla were randomly allocated into two groups: treated and control groups. In the treated group, patients were treated with full-time intermaxillary Class III elastics (C3E) anchored by a hybrid hyrax (HH) in the maxilla and a bone-supported bar in the mandible. Protraction was stopped after obtaining a positive overjet. Cephalometric radiographs were acquired before and after the treatment. Data were statistically analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis. Intergroup comparisons were also made using analysis of covariance with the readings at T0 as a covariate. RESULTS: Forty patients agreed to participate, and 30 of them completed the study (treated group, n = 17; control group, n = 13). The average treatment duration was 11.9 months. MAMP resulted in a significant maxillary advancement (A-VR, 4.34 mm) with significant control over the mandibular growth. No significant increase in the mandibular plane angle was found in the treated group compared with the control group. The upper and lower incisors showed significant protrusion in the treated group. CONCLUSIONS: Within the limitations of this study and high attrition rate, the MAMP protocol can effectively increase maxillary forward growth with good control over the growth of the mandible antero-posteriorly and vertically.

Comparison of the skeletodental effects of miniscrew-anchored and tooth-anchored facemask treatment in growing patients with skeletal class III malocclusions.

INTRODUCTION: This retrospective study aimed to evaluate the skeletal and dental effects of the miniscrew-anchored facemask in skeletal Class III growing patients and compare them with those of conventional tooth-anchored facemasks. METHODS: Retrospectively a total of 50 patients with skeletal Class III (mean ANB: -1.12°) were investigated and divided into two groups according to the treatment modality. Twenty-five patients were treated using the conventional tooth-anchored facemask (T group: mean age 9.3 ± 1.1 years, mean ANB: -0.93°) whereas the other 25 were treated using a miniscrew-anchored facemask (M group: mean age 9.7 ± 1.3 years. mean ANB: -1.61°). Two miniscrews were placed on the palate for bone anchorage. In both T and M groups, facemasks applied a force of 20-30° down on the occlusal plane, and the force increased from 200 g to 300-350 g per side throughout the treatments. The patients were instructed to wear facemasks for at least 14 h per day. A total of 16 angular and 11 linear cephalometric measurements were analysed to determine the skeletal and dental changes before and after facemask treatment. A paired t-test was used to verify the effects before and after treatment in each group. RESULTS: All miniscrews were well maintained during treatment. The values of SNA, SN-ANS, ANB and A to N-Perp, which indicate anterior protraction of the maxilla, were significantly higher in the M group compared with the T group (P < .05). Proclination of the maxillary incisors, extrusion and mesialization of the maxillary molars were significantly greater in the T group (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Miniscrew-anchored facemask treatment increased the amount of maxillary protraction and reduced the dental side effects compared with conventional tooth-anchored facemask treatment in growing patients with skeletal Class III malocclusion.

Quantifying health utilities of young adult orthodontic patients using the time trade-off method: a cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVE: To study the feasibility of time trade-off (TTO) method in quantifying health utility ratings in different types of malocclusion. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, 70 orthodontic patients aged 18 years or above, reporting for treatment/consultation, were included and interviewed. Malocclusion-related health utilities were assessed through the TTO method, and oral health-related quality of life was measured with the help of Orthognathic Quality of Life Questionnaire (OQLQ). Angle's classification of malocclusion was recorded. Bivariate analyses and multivariate Poisson's regression were done to find out an association between the oral health utility values, OQLQ and demographic and clinical characteristics. RESULTS: Patients with skeletal Class III malocclusion had lower health utility values than those with Class I and Class II malocclusions (p=0.013). Poisson's regression showed that Angle's Class II division 1 (0.90, CI 0.84 to 0.97), Class III (0.68, CI 0.59 to 0.95) and Skeletal malocclusion (0.79, CI 0.71 to 0.87) and OQLQ scores (1.0, CI 1 to 1.003) were found to be significant predictors of TTO utility scores. CONCLUSIONS: TTO utilities were found to be valid and well correlated with clinical findings. Health utilities could serve as useful and reliable markers of health-related quality of life (HRQL) among individuals or communities and help cost-effective preventive or intervention programs planning.

Class III treatment with mini-implants anchorage in young adult patients: short and long-term results.

INTRODUCTION: Class III malocclusion should be intercepted and treated at early age, to prevent the necessity of future complex and expensive procedures. The orthopedic facemask therapy has the goal to achieve skeletal changes, minimizing side effects on dentition. The use of skeletal anchorage, combined with Alternate Rapid Maxillary Expansion and Constriction (Alt-RAMEC) protocol, may be effective in treating a greater number of growing Class III patients. OBJECTIVE: To summarize the existing evidence-based literature on Class III malocclusion treatment in young adult patients, and to illustrate its application and effectiveness, by presenting an emblematic case report. CONCLUSION: The resolution of the present case, its long-term follow up, along with the studies conducted on a larger sample, demonstrate the effectiveness of the strategic combination of orthopedic and orthodontic treatments by using an hybrid rapid palatal expander and Alt-RAMEC protocol for treating Class III malocclusions in adult patients.

A 3-dimensional evaluation of available retromolar space for the application of ramal plates.

INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to evaluate the available retromolar space for ramal plates in patients with Class I and III malocclusions and compare that space with and without third molars using cone-beam computed tomography. METHODS: Cone-beam computed tomography images of 30 patients (17 males, 13 females; mean age, 22.2 ± 4.5 years) with Class III malocclusion and 29 subjects (18 males, 11 females; mean age, 24.3 ± 3.7 years) with Class I malocclusion were analyzed. Available retromolar space at 4 axial levels of the second molar root and the volume of the retromolar bone were evaluated. Two-way repeated measures analysis of covariance (repeated measures analysis of covariance) was applied to compare the variables between Class I and III malocclusions and the presence of third molars. RESULTS: Patients with Class I and III relationships showed up to 12.7 mm of available retromolar space at 2 mm apical from the cementoenamel junction (CEJ). At 8 mm apical from CEJ, patients with Class III malocclusion had 11.1 mm of space, whereas those with a Class I relationship showed 9.8 mm of available space. When patients had third molars, the amount of available retromolar space was significantly greater in patients with a Class I and III relationship. However, patients with Class III malocclusion exhibited greater available retromolar space than those with a Class I relationship (P = 0.028). In addition, the bone volume was significantly greater in patients with Class III malocclusion than in patients with a Class I relationship and those with third molars than in those without them (P <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Class I and III groups showed the availability of at least 10.0 mm of retromolar space 2 mm apical to the CEJ for molar distalization. Based on this information, it is suggested that clinicians consider available retromolar space for molar distalization in diagnosing and planning treatment for patients with Class I and III malocclusion.

Maxillary Protraction: A Bibliometric Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this analysis was to investigate the historical development, current status, and research hot spots related to maxillary protraction in the treatment of maxillary hypoplasia. METHODS: The term "TS = maxillary protraction" was used to search for articles in the Web of Science Core Collection at the library of Capital Medical University. The results were analysed using CiteSpace6.2.R1 software, including the examination of annual publication trends and analysis of author, country, institution, and keywords. RESULTS: A total of 483 papers were included in this study. The annual publications showed an overall increasing trend. The top 5 authors with the most published papers were Lorenzo Franchi, Tiziano Baccetti, Seung-Hak Baek, Paola Cozza, and U Hagg. The top 5 countries with the highest publication counts were the US, Turkey, South Korea, Italy, and China. The top 5 institutions in terms of the number of published papers were the University of Florence, the University of Michigan, Kyung Hee University, Seoul National University, and Gazi University. The top 3 journals with the most citations were the American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, Angle Orthodontist, and the European Journal of Orthodontics. Furthermore, "Maxillary protraction," "Class III malocclusion," and "Maxillary expansion" were the most common keywords. CONCLUSIONS: The effective age range for maxillary protraction has been expanded with the introduction of skeletal anchorage and the combination of maxillary expansion and protraction. Skeletal anchorage offers significant advantages over dental anchorage, but there is a need for further research to further substantiate its stability and safety. In recent years, the positive effects of maxillary protraction on the nasopharyngeal area have been well established, but its impact on the oropharyngeal area remains a topic of debate. Therefore, it is crucial to conduct further investigations into the effects of maxillary protraction on the oropharyngeal area and explore the factors that influence different outcomes.

Effects of Alt-RAMEC protocol with facemask therapy in cleft lip palate patients in a sample of Pakistani population.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study is to evaluate the skeletal, dentoalveolar and soft tissue changes before and after treatment with Alt-RAMEC protocol and protraction headgear in comparison to the controls. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A quasi experimental study was conducted in the orthodontic department on 60 patients of cleft lip and palate. These patients were divided into two groups. Group I was the Alt-RAMEC group that underwent Alt-RAMEC protocol followed by facemask therapy while group II was the control group that underwent RME and facemask therapy. Total treatment time in both the groups was approximately 6 to 7 months. Mean and standard deviation was calculated for all the quantitative variables. Pre and post treatment changes between treatment and control groups were made using paired t-test. Intergroup comparison between treatment and control group was analyzed using independent t-test. Significance for all tests was predetermined at a P-value of ≤ 0.05. RESULTS: The Alt-RAMEC group showed significant forward movement of maxilla and improvement in the maxillary base. A remarkable improvement in SNA was seen. The overall outcome was better maxillo-mandibular relationship as shown by positive ANB values and angle of convexity. More effect on maxilla and least effect on mandible was notified with Alt-RAMEC protocol and facemask therapy. Improvement in transverse relationship was also evident in the Alt-RAMEC group. CONCLUSION: Alt-RAMEC protocol in combination with protraction headgear is a better alternative to treat cleft lip and palate patients in comparison to the conventional protocol.

Evaluation of Head and Cervical Spine Posture after Therapy with Maxillary Protraction Appliances / Evaluación de la Postura de la Cabeza y la Columna Cervical Después de la Terapia con Aparatos de Protracción Maxilar

SUMMARY: The objective of this study was to evaluate the changes of head and cervical spine posture of skeletal class malocclusion in adolescent with maxillary protraction. Thirty cases of skeletal class malocclusion were randomly selected from the Stomatological Hospital of Shanxi Medical University. High-quality lateral cephalograms were collected including pre- and posttreatment to compare the changes of head and cervical spine posture. Data were processed using SPSS 26.0 statistical software. The paired-t test was used to compare pre- and posttreatment mean angular measurements.A significant difference in the SNA(p<0.001), SNB(p<0.01), and ANB(p<0.001) between T1 and T2 showed an improvement in the sagittal relationships. A significant change was observed in middle cervical spine posture, while upper cervical spine posture variables showed no significant difference after treatment. Skeletal class with maxillary protraction appliance not only led to the improvement of sagittal relationship, but also changed the middle cervical spine posture.

El objetivo de este estudio fue evaluar los cambios en la postura de la cabeza y la columna cervical debido a la maloclusión clase esquelética en adolescentes con protracción maxilar. Treinta casos de maloclusión de clase esquelética fueron seleccionados al azar del Hospital Estomatológico de la Universidad Médica de Shanxi. Se recogieron cefalogramas laterales de alta calidad, incluidos el tratamiento previo y posterior, para comparar los cambios en la postura de la cabeza y la columna cervical. Los datos se procesaron con el software estadístico SPSS 26.0. Se utilizó la prueba t pareada para comparar las medidas angulares medias antes y después del tratamiento. Una diferencia significativa en SNA (p <0,001), SNB (p <0,01) y ANB (p <0,001) entre T1 y T2 mostró una mejora en las relaciones sagitales. Se observó un cambio significativo en la postura de la columna cervical media, mientras que las variables de postura de la columna cervical superior no mostraron diferencias significativas después del tratamiento. La clase esquelética con aparato de protracción maxilar no solo condujo a la mejora de la relación sagital, sino que también cambió la postura de la columna cervical media.

Airway dimensional changes following bone anchored maxillary protraction: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The introduction of skeletal anchorage utilized for maxillary protraction with a face mask or class III elastics has been developed for the management of class III malocclusions with minimal dental effect. The objective of the present review was to evaluate the current evidence regarding airway dimensional changes following bone-anchored maxillary protraction. A search was conducted by two authors (S.A & B.A) in the following databases: MEDLINE via PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Scopus, Google Scholar and Open Grey; besides a hand search in references of selected articles and developing a search alert in electronic databases. Selection criteria comprised randomized as well as prospective clinical trials evaluating airway dimensional changes following bone-anchored maxillary protraction. Relevant data were extracted after studies retrieval and selection. The risk of bias was thereafter evaluated using the revised RoB 2 tool for randomized clinical trials and the ROBINS-I tool was used for non-randomized clinical trials. The quality of studies was assessed using the modified Jadad score. After examining (eligibility) full-text articles, four clinical trials were ultimately included. These studies evaluated the airway dimensional changes, following bone-anchored maxillary protraction in comparison to different control study groups. Based on the available evidence, all the bone-anchored maxillary protraction devices used in the eligible studies in the present systematic review resulted in an improvement in the airway dimensions. However, due to the few numbers of studies available and the guarded evidence due to the low quality of evidence of three out of four included articles, there is no strong evidence to support a significant increase in the airway dimensions following bone-anchored maxillary protraction. Therefore, there is a need for more randomized controlled clinical trials with similar bone-anchored protraction devices and similar assessment methods for more valid comparisons, excluding any confounding factors, on airway dimensional changes.

The effect of tooth borne versus skeletally anchored Alt-RAMEC protocol in early treatment of Class III malocclusion: a single-centre randomized clinical trial.

TRIAL DESIGN: This was a randomized, controlled trial designed to compare outcomes between the use of dental and skeletal anchorage, using the Face mask/Alternate Rapid Maxillary Expansion and Contraction (FM/Alt-RAMEC) protocol. METHODS AND PARTICIPANTS: The study was carried out at Mater Dei Hospital, Malta and included prepubertal skeletal Class III malocclusion patients where the aetiology was primarily maxillary hypoplasia. INTERVENTIONS: Two groups were assigned. Group I was treated with FM/Alt-RAMEC and group II was treated with skeletally anchored FM/Alt-RAMEC. Wear-time (WT) of the FM was monitored using TheraMon microsensors. Patients were instructed to wear the FM for 12-14 hours/day for 9 months. Changes were evaluated with lateral cephalograms and analysed with Wilcoxon and Mann-Whitney U tests. ANOVA was used to analyse the effect of gender on compliance parameters. Spearman's correlation coefficient was used to assess the correlation between compliance and skeletal changes. OBJECTIVE: To compare the skeletal and dentoalveolar changes in patients treated with these two protocols. OUTCOMES: The primary outcome was to assess skeletal and dentoalveolar outcomes in patients treated with skeletally anchored FM/RME and tooth-borne FM/RME; utilizing Alt-RAMEC protocol. The secondary outcome was compliance rate and adherence to FM wear among patients. RANDOMIZATION: Randomizer software and the sealed envelope technique were used to randomly allocate patients 1:1 into either group I (tooth-borne FM/Alt-RAMEC) or group II (skeletally anchored FM/Alt-RAMEC). BLINDING: It was not possible to blind to treatment allocation, but blinding was used when assessing the outcomes. RESULTS: Numbers randomized and analysed. Thirty-five patients were allocated. Group I consisted of 18 subjects and group II consisted of 17 subjects. One patient in group I dropped out due to illness, so 17 subjects in each group completed the study. OUTCOMES: Post-treatment changes in group I showed significant increases in SNA (2.10°), ANB (3.90°), Wits (4.70 mm), and overjet (5.40 mm). Group II showed significant increases in ANB (3.10°), Wits (3.20 mm), and overjet (4.50 mm). Wearing time for group I patients was 7.87 ± 2.88 hours/day and for group II was 6.98 ± 2.68 hours/day, with no significant difference between the groups. LIMITATIONS: Lack of long-term follow-up post-treatment, making the conclusion applicable only in the short term. HARMS: No harm was observed in both groups. CONCLUSION: Despite the large difference between the measured and the patient-reported daily WT, both tooth-borne and skeletally anchored FM/Alt-RAMEC showed positive, similar, skeletal and dental effects. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN12197405.