Changes in Craniofacial Morphology of Class III Malocclusion Treated Using Facemask or Active Skeletonized Sutural Distractor Appliance

Authors

Wael Ahmed Bayomy Mohamed, Orthodontic Unit, School of Dental Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Kelantan, Malaysia
Rozita Hassan, Orthodontic Unit, School of Dental Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Kelantan, Malaysia
Norma Ab Rahman, Orthodontic Unit, School of Dental Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Kelantan, MalaysiaFollow
Shaifulizan Ab Rahman, Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery Unit, School of Dental Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Kelantan, Malaysia
Norkhafizah Saddki, Dental Public Health Unit, School of Dental Sciences, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Kelantan, Malaysia

Abstract

Objective: This research compared the effectiveness of the Active Skeletonized Sutural Distractor (ASSD) and the face mask (FM) in treating adolescent Class III malocclusion and assessed the stability of the mini screw utilized in the ASSD appliance. Methods: A total of 68 adolescents with Class III malocclusion were divided into either one of two treatment groups (ASSD or FM) for a maximum period of six months of therapy. Lateral cephalometric radiographs and impressions were taken for comparative purposes. The 3M® intra-oral elastic (USA) was attached to the mini-implant, and the mini-screw mobility was evaluated monthly using a force gauge (Correx®, Orthocare, UK). Changes in craniofacial morphology were compared using dependent and independent t-tests, respectively. The significance threshold was set at 0.05. Results: A total of 54 participants were included due to a drop-out. Statistically significant improvements were found in soft tissues and dentoskeletal parameters following treatment with both ASSD and FM. However, participants treated with ASSD showed significantly greater changes compared to FM. Except for inter premolar and inter molar width in the FM group, and intermolar width and palatal width in the ASSD group, neither appliance had a significant influence on palate and dental arch parameters after treatment. The percentage of mini-screw stability was 61.53%. Most participants (73.07%) in the ASSD group achieved corrections over 6 months. Conclusion: The ASSD has the potential to treat Class III malocclusion with better outcomes than the conventional FM and may replace the necessity for surgery.

References

1. 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.
2. Williams MD, Sarver DM, Sadowsky PL, Bradley E. Combined rapid maxillary expansion and protraction facemask in the treatment of Class III malocclusions in growing children: A prospective long-term study. Semin Orthod. 1997; 3(4):265–74.
3. 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(6):675–85.
4. Yoshida I, Shoji T, Mizoguchi I. Effects of treatment with a combined maxillary protraction and chincap appliance in skeletal Class III patients with different vertical skeletal morphologies. Eur J Orthod. 2007; 29(2):126–33.
5. Baccetti T, Franchi L, Cameron CG, McNamara JA Jr. Treatment timing for rapid maxillary expansion. Angle Orthod. 2001; 71(5):343–50.
6. Mandall N, DiBiase A, Littlewood S, Nute S, Stivaros N, McDowall R, Shargill I, Worthington H, Cousley R, Dyer F, Mattick R, Doherty B. Is early Class III protraction facemask treatment effective? A multicentre, randomized, controlled trial: 15-month follow-up. J Orthod. 2010; 37(3):149–61.
7. Steinberg B, Padwa BL, Boyne P, Kaban L. State of the art in oral and maxillofacial surgery: Treatment of maxillary hypoplasia and anterior palatal and alveolar clefts. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 1999; 36(4):283–91.
8. Yen SL. Protocols for late maxillary protraction in cleft lip and palate patients at Childrens Hospital Los Angeles. Semin Orthod. 2011; 17(2):138–48.
9. Kircelli BH, Pektas ZO. Midfacial protraction with skeletally anchored face mask therapy: A novel approach and preliminary results. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2008; 133(3):440–9.
10. 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 Dentofacial Orthop. 2010; 137(2):274–84.
11. Sar C, Arman-Özçırpıcı A, Uçkan S, Yazıcı AC. Comparative evaluation of maxillary protraction with or without skeletal anchorage. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2011; 139(5):636–49.
12. Cha CK, Ngan PW. Skeletal anchorage for orthopaedic correction of growing class III patients. Semin Orthod. 2011; 17(2):124–37.
13. Cevidanes L, Baccetti T, Franchi L, McNamara JA Jr, 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.
14. Jamilian A, Showkatbakhsh R. Treatment of maxillary deficiency by miniscrew implants--A case report. J Orthod. 2010; 37(1):56–61.
15. Liu C, Hou M, Liang L, Huang X, Zhang T, Zhang H, Ma X, Song R. Sutural distraction osteogenesis (SDO) versus osteotomy distraction osteogenesis (ODO) for midfacial advancement: A new technique and primary clinical report. J Craniofac Surg. 2005; 16(4):537–48.
16. Liou EJ, Tsai WC. A new protocol for maxillary protraction in cleft patients: Repetitive weekly protocol of alternate rapid maxillary expansions and constrictions. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2005; 42(2):121–7.
17. Isci D, Turk T, Elekdag-Turk S. Activation-deactivation rapid palatal expansion and reverse headgear in Class III cases. Eur J Orthod. 2010; 32(6):706–15.
18. Baccetti T, Franchi L, McNamara Jr JA. The cervical vertebral maturation (CVM) method for the assessment of optimal treatment timing in dentofacial orthopaedics. Semin Orthod. 2005; 11(3):119–29.
19. Küçükkeleş N, Nevzatoğlu S, Koldaş T. Rapid maxillary expansion compared to surgery for assistance in maxillary face mask protraction. Angle Orthod. 2011; 81(1):42–9.
20. Saghaei M. Random allocation software for parallel group randomized trials. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2004; 4:26.
21. Bryan C. The ortho implant using the cope placement protocol: Big results from a tiny Implant. Cope JB, editor. Ortho Tads: The Clinical Guide and Atlas. California: Under Dog Media; 2006.
22. Cunha ACD, Lee H, Nojima LI, Nojima MDCG, Lee KJ. Miniscrew-assisted rapid palatal expansion for managing arch perimeter in an adult patient. Dental Press J Orthod. 2017; 22(3):97–108.
23. Katyal V, Wilmes B, Nienkemper M, Darendeliler MA, Sampson W, Drescher D. The efficacy of Hybrid Hyrax-Mentoplate combination in early Class III treatment: A novel approach and pilot study. Aust Orthod J. 2016; 32(1):88–96.
24. Gautam P, Valiathan A, Adhikari R. Stress and displacement patterns in the craniofacial skeleton with rapid maxillary expansion: A finite element method study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2007; 132(1):5.e1–11.
25. McNamara JA Jr. An orthopedic approach to the treatment of Class III malocclusion in young patients. J Clin Orthod. 1987; 21(9):598–608.
26. Haas AJ. Palatal expansion: Just the beginning of dentofacial orthopedics. Am J Orthod. 1970; 57(3):219–55.
27. Wang YC, Liou EJ. Comparison of the loading behavior of self-drilling and predrilled miniscrews throughout orthodontic loading. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2008; 133(1):38–43.
28. Watkinson S, Harrison JE, Furness S, Worthington HV. Orthodontic treatment for prominent lower front teeth (Class III malocclusion) in children. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013; (9):CD003451.
29. Cordasco G, Matarese G, Rustico L, Fastuca S, Caprioglio A, Lindauer SJ, Nucera R. Efficacy of orthopedic treatment with protraction facemask on skeletal Class III malocclusion: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Orthod Craniofac Res. 2014; 17(3):133–43.
30. Kiliçoglu H, Kirliç Y. Profile changes in patients with class III malocclusions after Delaire mask therapy. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1998; 113(4):453–62.
31. Vaughn GA, Mason B, Moon HB, Turley PK. The effects of maxillary protraction therapy with or without rapid palatal expansion: A prospective, randomized clinical trial. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2005; 128(3):299–309.
32. Morales-Fernández M, Iglesias-Linares A, Yañez-Vico RM, Mendoza-Mendoza A, Solano-Reina E. Bone- and dentoalveolar-anchored dentofacial orthopedics for Class III malocclusion: new approaches, similar objectives? : A systematic review. Angle Orthod. 2013; 83(3):540–52.
33. Arman A, Ufuk Toygar T, Abuhijleh E. Evaluation of maxillary protraction and fixed appliance therapy in Class III patients. Eur J Orthod. 2006; 28(4):383–92.
34. Atalay Z, Tortop T. Dentofacial effects of a modified tandem traction bow appliance. Eur J Orthod. 2010; 32(6):655–61.
35. Cozza P, Baccetti T, Mucedero M, Pavoni C, Franchi L. Treatment and posttreatment effects of a facial mask combined with a bite-block appliance in Class III malocclusion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2010; 138(3):300–10.
36. De Clerck H, Cevidanes L, Baccetti T. Dentofacial effects of bone-anchored maxillary protraction: A controlled study of consecutively treated Class III patients. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2010; 138(5):577–81.
37. Jamilian A, Haraji A, Showkatbakhsh R, Valaee N. The effects of miniscrew with Class III traction in growing patients with maxillary deficiency. Int J Orthod Milwaukee. 2011; 22(2):25–30.
38. Moon W. An interview with Won Moon. By André Wilson Machado, Barry Briss, Greg J Huang, Richard Kulbersh and Sergei Godeiro Fernandes Rabelo Caldas. Dental Press J Orthod. 2013; 18(3):12–28.
39. Yüksel S, Uçem TT, Keykubat A. Early and late facemask therapy. Eur J Orthod. 2001; 23(5):559–68.
40. Yavuz I, Halicioğlu K, Ceylan I. Face mask therapy effects in two skeletal maturation groups of female subjects with skeletal Class III malocclusions. Angle Orthod. 2009; 79(5):842–8.
41. Lee KJ, Park YC, Park JY, Hwang WS. Miniscrew-assisted nonsurgical palatal expansion before orthognathic surgery for a patient with severe mandibular prognathism. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2010; 137(6):830–9.
42. Sandikçioğlu M, Hazar S. Skeletal and dental changes after maxillary expansion in the mixed dentition. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1997; 111(3):321–7.
43. da Silva Filho OG, Montes LA, Torelly LF. Rapid maxillary expansion in the deciduous and mixed dentition evaluated through posteroanterior cephalometric analysis. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1995; 107(3):268–75.
44. Karagkiolidou A, Ludwig B, Pazera P, Gkantidis N, Pandis N, Katsaros C. Survival of palatal miniscrews used for orthodontic appliance anchorage: A retrospective cohort study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2013; 143(6):767–72.
45. Motoyoshi M, Uemura M, Ono A, Okazaki K, Shigeeda T, Shimizu N. Factors affecting the long-term stability of orthodontic mini-implants. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2010; 137(5):588.e1–5.

Recommended Citation

Mohamed, W. B., Hassan, R., Ab Rahman, N., Ab Rahman, S., & Saddki, N. Changes in Craniofacial Morphology of Class III Malocclusion Treated Using Facemask or Active Skeletonized Sutural Distractor Appliance. J Dent Indones. 2025;32(1): 1-10