Facemask Effects in Two Types of Intraoral Appliances : Bonded Expander vs. Hyrax

박찬영; 박기태

doi:10.5933/JKAPD.2015.42.1.45

The purpose of this study was to compare and evaluate facemask effects when two types of intraoralappliances were used for maxillary protraction for patients with class III malocclusion. Eighteen patients withclass III malocclusion were treated with a facemask for an average of 12 months. Two types of intraoralappliances were used: nine patients were treated with bonded expander (Group 1), and nine patients withHyrax (Group 2). Cephalometric radiographs were taken before and after treatment. Cephalometric radiographswere traced, analyzed, and the results such as sagittal, vertical and soft-tissue changes were compared betweentwo groups. The amount of anchorage loss was also measured to evaluate the difference between two groups. All patients showed significant sagittal skeletal changes after treatment, and there was no statisticallysignificant difference between the two groups. When anchorage loss was evaluated, no differences were shownbetween the two. Facemask with Hyrax or bonded expander is similarly an effective method as a treatment in class IIImalocclusion patients.

Citation status

KCI Citation Counts (1)
열림/닫힘 버튼
REFERENCES (21)
열림/닫힘 버튼
* 2021년 이후 발행 논문의 참고문헌은 현재 구축 중입니다.

[journal] Solano-Mendoza B / 2012 / Maxillary protraction at early ages. The revolution of new bone anchorage appliances / J Clin Pediatr Dent 37 : 219~229

[journal] Baik HS / 2000 / Cephalometric characteristics of Korean Class III surgical patients and their relationship to plans for surgical treatment / Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg 15 : 119~128

[journal] Chan GK / 1974 / Class 3 malocclusion in Chinese (Cantonese): Etiology and treatment / Am J Orthod 65 : 152~157

[journal] Ellis E, 3rd / 1984 / Components of adult Class III malocclusion / J Oral Maxillofac Surg 42 : 295~305

[journal] Gautam P / 2009 / Maxillary protraction with and without maxillary expansion: A finite element analysis of sutural stresses / Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 136 : 361~366

[journal] Kim SE / 1998 / Case reports on treatment of skeletal class III malocclusion with RME and facemask / J Korean Acad Pediatr Dent 25 : 604~612

[journal] 이상호 / 2007 / Diagnosis and treatment of Class III malocclusion in Children / 대한소아치과학회지 / 대한소아치과학회 34(4) : 725~740

[book] McNamara J / 2004 / Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics / Shinhung International Publishing

[journal] Kim JH / 1999 / The effectiveness of protraction face mask therapy : a metaanalysis / Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 115 : 675~685

[journal] Rossi M / 2011 / Skeletal alterations associated with the use of bonded rapid maxillary expansion appliance / Braz Dent J 22 : 334~339

[confproc] Ngan P / 2007 / Comparison of Protraction Facemask Response Using Banded and Bonded Expansion Appliances as Anchorage / Seminars in Orthodontics 13 : 175~185

[journal] Lione R / 2013 / Does rapid maxillary expansion induce adverse effects in growing subjects? / Angle Orthod 83 : 172~182

[journal] Asanza S / 1997 / Comparison of Hyrax and bonded expansion appliances / Angle Orthod 67 : 15~22

[journal] Reed N / 1999 / Comparison of treatment outcomes with banded and bonded RPE appliances / Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 116 : 31~40

[journal] Sar C / 2011 / Comparative evaluation of maxillary protraction with or without skeletal anchorage / Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 139 : 636~649

[journal] Nielsen IL / 1989 / Maxillary superimposition: a comparison of three methods for cephalometric evaluation of growth and treatment change / Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 95 : 422~431

[journal] Kircelli BH / 2008 / Midfacial protraction with skeletally anchored face mask therapy: a novel approach and preliminary results / Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 133 : 440~449

[journal] Lee NK / 2012 / 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 82 : 846~852

[journal] Feng X / 2012 / Effectiveness of TADanchored maxillary protraction in late mixed dentition / Angle Orthod 82 : 1107~1114

[journal] Cha BK / 139 / Maxillary protraction with miniplates providing skeletal anchorage in a growing Class III patient / Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop : 99~112

[journal] Baek SH / 2010 / New treatment modality for maxillary hypoplasia in cleft patients. Protraction facemask with miniplate anchorage / Angle Orthod 80 : 783~791

KJC Korea
Journal Central

Statistics

Tools

Sharing

Issue List

Citation status