Korean J Orthod.  2015 Jul;45(4):209-214. 10.4041/kjod.2015.45.4.209.

New approach of maxillary protraction using modified C-palatal plates in Class III patients

• Kook YA
• Bayome M
• Park JH
• Kim KB
• Kim SH
• Chung KR

• KMID: 2400579
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.4041/kjod.2015.45.4.209

Abstract

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.

Keyword

Maxillary protraction; Modified C-palatal plate; Class III malocclusion-growing patient

MeSH Terms

Adolescent
Humans
Malocclusion
Masks

Figure

• 

  Figure 1 Placement of the modified C-palatal plate. A, the plate fixed on the palate; B, the jig-plate assembly; C, the plate connected to the face mask via elastics.

• 

  Figure 2 Pretreatment and post-treatment facial and intraoral photographs.

• 

  Figure 3 Pretreatment (A) and post-treatment (B) lateral cephalometric radiographs derived from cone-beam computed tomography images.

• 

  Figure 4 Superimposed cephalometric tracings (black, pretreatment; red, post-treatment).

Reference

1. Baik HS. Clinical results of the maxillary protraction in Korean children. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1995; 108:583–592. PMID: 7503035.

2. Gallagher RW, Miranda F, Buschang PH. Maxillary protraction: treatment and posttreatment effects. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1998; 113:612–619. PMID: 9637563.

3. Kama JD, Ozer T, Baran S. Orthodontic and orthopaedic changes associated with treatment in subjects with Class III malocclusions. Eur J Orthod. 2006; 28:496–502. PMID: 16772318.

4. Kim JH, Viana MA, Graber TM, Omerza FF, BeGole EA. The effectiveness of protraction face mask therapy: a meta-analysis. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1999; 115:675–685. PMID: 10358251.

5. Smalley WM, Shapiro PA, Hohl TH, Kokich VG, Brånemark PI. Osseointegrated titanium implants for maxillofacial protraction in monkeys. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1988; 94:285–295. PMID: 3177282.

6. Singer SL, Henry PJ, Rosenberg I. Osseointegrated implants as an adjunct to facemask therapy: a case report. Angle Orthod. 2000; 70:253–262. PMID: 10926436.

7. Enacar A, Giray B, Pehlivanoglu M, Iplikcioglu H. Facemask therapy with rigid anchorage in a patient with maxillary hypoplasia and severe oligodontia. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2003; 123:571–577. PMID: 12750679.

8. Cha BK, Choi DS, Ngan P, Jost-Brinkmann PG, Kim SM, Jang IS. Maxillary protraction with miniplates providing skeletal anchorage in a growing Class III patient. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2011; 139:99–112. PMID: 21195283.

9. 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 Orthod. 2011; 81:639–646. PMID: 21299407.

10. Han S, Bayome M, Lee J, Lee YJ, Song HH, Kook YA. Evaluation of palatal bone density in adults and adolescents for application of skeletal anchorage devices. Angle Orthod. 2012; 82:625–631. PMID: 22077190.

11. Lee SM, Park JH, Bayome M, Kim HS, Mo SS, Kook YA. Palatal soft tissue thickness at different ages using an ultrasonic device. J Clin Pediatr Dent. 2012; 36:405–409. PMID: 23019841.

12. Ryu JH, Park JH, Vu Thi, Bayome M, Kim Y, Kook YA. Palatal bone thickness compared with cone-beam computed tomography in adolescents and adults for mini-implant placement. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2012; 142:207–212. PMID: 22858330.

13. Favero L, Winkler A, Favero V. Non-compliant maxillary protraction by orthodontic micro-implants. Eur J Paediatr Dent. 2012; 13:244–248. PMID: 22971266.

14. Ludwig B, Glas B, Bowman SJ, Drescher D, Wilmes B. Miniscrew-supported Class III treatment with the Hybrid RPE Advancer. J Clin Orthod. 2010; 44:533–539. PMID: 21280544.

15. Kook YA, Kim SH, Chung KR. A modified palatal anchorage plate for simple and efficient distalization. J Clin Orthod. 2010; 44:719–730. PMID: 21591548.

16. Kook YA, Lee DH, Kim SH, Chung KR. Design improvements in the modified C-palatal plate for molar distalization. J Clin Orthod. 2013; 47:241–248. PMID: 23660818.

17. Lee J, Miyazawa K, Tabuchi M, Sato T, Kawaguchi M, Goto S. Effectiveness of en-masse retraction using midpalatal miniscrews and a modified transpalatal arch: Treatment duration and dentoskeletal changes. Korean J Orthod. 2014; 44:88–95. PMID: 24696825.

18. Kim KY, Bayome M, Park JH, Kim KB, Mo SS, Kook YA. Displacement and stress distribution of the maxillofacial complex during maxillary protraction with buccal versus palatal plates: finite element analysis. Eur J Orthod. 2015; 37:275–283. PMID: 25090997.

19. 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; 82:1107–1114. PMID: 22458766.

20. Nienkemper M, Wilmes B, Franchi L, Drescher D. Effectiveness of maxillary protraction using a hybrid hyrax-facemask combination: A controlled clinical study. Angle Orthod. 2014; [Epub ahead of print].

21. Nguyen T, Cevidanes L, Cornelis MA, Heymann G, de Paula LK, De Clerck H. Three-dimensional assessment of maxillary changes associated with bone anchored maxillary protraction. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2011; 140:790–798. PMID: 22133943.

22. Joo MC. Evaluation of Palatal Plate Effects on the speech Articulation using acoustic analysis Dentistry [MSD dissertation]. Seoul: The Catholic University of Korea;2012.