Treatment Approach for Maxillary Hypoplasia in Cleft Patients: Class III Elastics with Skeletal Anchorage (Report of Two Cases)

Document Type : Case Report

Authors

1 Dental Research Center, School of Dentistry, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran

2 Oral and Maxillary Diseases Research Center, School of Dentistry, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran.

3 Department of Orthodontics, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran.

4 Oral and Maxillofacial Diseases Research Center, School of Dentistry, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran.

Abstract

Introduction:
Treatment ofcleft lip and palate patients requires a multidisciplinary plan. These patients usually have a hypoplastic maxilla due to the prior surgical scars. Orthognathic surgery to advance the maxilla in these patients is not very efficient; therefore, orthopedic interventions during an appropriate age seems to be essential.
 
Case Report:
In this article, two cleft lip and palate patients have been treated with Class III elastics anchored to the maxillary posterior and mandibular anterior miniplates in order to induce maxillary advancement.
 
Conclusion:
Both cases showed a significant improvement in their profiles with minimal dentoalveolar compensations. A counterclockwise rotation of the mandible occurred.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

1. Papadopulos NA, Zeilhofer HF, Papadopoulos MA, Feussner H, Henke J, Kovacs L, et al. Experimental endoscopic intrauterine surgery for craniofacial malformations such as the cleft lip and palate MKG  2003;7(2):70-5.
2. Berkowitz S. Cleft lip and palate: diagnosis and management. 2nd ed. Berlin: Springer Science & Business Media; 2006:392-4.
3. Chong YH, Ive JC, Artun J. Changes following the use of protraction headgear for early correction of Class III malocclusion. Angle Orthod 1996; 66(5): 351-62.
4. Hata S, Itoh T, Nakagawa M, Kamogashira K, Ichikawa K, Matsumoto M, et al. Biomechanical effects of maxillary protraction on the craniofacial complex. Am JOrthod Dentofac Orthop 1987; 91(4): 305-11.
5. Pangrazio-Kulbersh V, Berger J, Kersten G. Effects of protraction mechanics on the midface. Am JOrthod Dentofac Orthop 1998;114(5):484-91.
6. Westwood PV, McNamara Jr JA., Baccetti T, Franchi L, Sarver DM. Long-term effects of Class III treatment with rapid maxillary expansion and facemask therapy followed by fixed appliances. Am JOrthod Dentofac Orthop 2003;123(3):306-20.
7. Dogan S. The effects of face mask therapy in cleft lip and palate patients. Ann Maxillofac Surg 2012; 2(2):116-20.
8. Baik HS. Clinical results of the maxillary protraction in Korean children. Am JOrthod Dentofac Orthop 1995;108(6):583-92.
9. Kajiyama K, Murakami T, Suzuki A. Comparison of orthodontic and orthopedic effects of a modified maxillary protractor between deciduous and early mixed dentitions. Am JOrthod Dentofac Orthop 2004;126(1):23-32.
10. Cevidanes L, Baccetti T, Franchi L, McNamara Jr JA, De Clerck H. Comparison of two protocols for maxillary protraction: bone anchors versus face mask with rapid maxillary expansion. Angle Orthod 2010;80(5):799-806.
11. Feng X, Li J, Li Y, Zhao Z, Zhao S, Wang J. Effectiveness of TAD-anchored maxillary protraction in late mixed dentition. Angle Orthod 2012; 82 (6): 1107-14.
12. Lee NK, Yang IH, Baek SH. The short-term treatment effects of face mask therapy in Class III patients based on the anchorage device: miniplates vs rapid maxillary expansion. Angle Orthod 2012; 82(5): 846-52.
13. Baek SH, Kim KW, Choi JY. New treatment modality for maxillary hypoplasia in cleft patients. Protraction facemask with miniplate anchorage. Angle Orthodontist  2010; 80(4):783-91.
14. Heymann GC, Cevidanes L, Cornelis M, De Clerck HJ, Tulloch JF. Three-dimensional analysis of maxillary protraction with intermaxillary elastics to miniplates. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2010; 137(2): 274-84.
15. Jacobson A, Jacobson R. Radiographic cephalometry from basic to 3-D imaging. 2nd ed. London: Quintessence Publishing Co,Inc; 2006:
63-78.
16. Jacobson A, Jacobson R. Radiographic cephalometry from basic to 3-D imaging. 2nd ed. London:Quintessence Publishing Co, Inc; 2006:
205-17.
17. Ahn HW, Kim KW, Yang IH, Choi JY, Baek SH. Comparison of the effects of maxillary protraction using facemask and miniplate anchorage between unilateral and bilateral cleft lip and palate patients. Angle Orthod  2012;82(5):935-41.
18. Kaya D, Kocadereli I, Kan B, Tasar F. Effects of facemask treatment anchored with miniplates after alternate rapid maxillary expansions and constrictions; a pilot study. Angle Orthod2011;81(4):639-46.
Iranian Journal of Otorhinolaryngology
Volume 28, Issue 4
July and August 2016
Pages 297-302

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics