2002Chinese Journal of OrthodonticsRequires access

Preliminary Study on Methods Selection in Treatment of Class III Malocclusion in Mixed Dentition

GU Yon

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

Objective To help clinicians make a decision on treatment plan of Class Ⅲ malocclusion with undeveloped maxilla in mixed dentition. Methods The sample included orthodontic treatment and orthopedic treatment groups, which consisted of 15 patients, respectively, with Class Ⅲ malocclusion due to undeveloped maxilla. The selection criteria included (1) Anterior crossbites (2 ) - 2 ANB 1 ( 3 ) Cephalometric analysis showed undeveloped maxilla and normal growth of the mandible (4) Growing patients (5) Mild Concave profile. Patients in orthodontic group were treated with 2×4 appliance and with stable treatment effects after two years follow - up. Patients in orthopedic group were treated with reverse headgear when failure or relapse was noted after treatment with 2×4 appliance within one year. Cephalometric analysis was performed with pretreatment lateral cephalograms. T - test was assessed to compare significant difference between the two groups. Discriminate analysis was performed and its result helped to select the treatment method to Class Ⅲ malocclusion in mixed dentition. Results The average value of NSAr was significantly smaller in orthodontic treatment group ( p 0.01) , anterior cranial base length ( p 0.001) and posterior cranial base length (p0.01) was significantly larger in orthodontic treatment group. Prediction Index (PI) = -0.2 (NSAr) + 0.243 (anterior cranial base length) + 0.187 (posterior cranial base length) + 3.366. Conclusion With larger PI ( 0) , with greater success of treatment with 2×4 appliances in Class Ⅲ malocclusion in mixed dentition, due to undeveloped maxilla is expected.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Objective To help clinicians make a decision on treatment plan of Class Ⅲ malocclusion with undeveloped maxilla in mixed dentition. Methods The sample included orthodontic treatment and orthopedic treatment groups, which consisted of 15 patients, respectively, with Class Ⅲ malocclusion due to undeveloped maxilla. The selection criteria included (1) Anterior crossbites (2 ) - 2 ANB 1 ( 3 ) Cephalometric analysis showed undeveloped maxilla and normal growth of the mandible (4) Growing patients (5) Mild Concave profile. Patients in orthodontic group were treated with 2×4 appliance and with stable treatment effects after two years follow - up. Patients in orthopedic group were treated with reverse headgear when failure or relapse was noted after treatment with 2×4 appliance within one year. Cephalometric analysis was performed with pretreatment lateral cephalograms. T - test was assessed to compare significant difference between the two groups. Discriminate analysis was performed and its result helped to select the treatment method to Class Ⅲ malocclusion in mixed dentition. Results The average value of NSAr was significantly smaller in orthodontic treatment group ( p 0.01) , anterior cranial base length ( p 0.001) and posterior cranial base length (p0.01) was significantly larger in orthodontic treatment group. Prediction Index (PI) = -0.2 (NSAr) + 0.243 (anterior cranial base length) + 0.187 (posterior cranial base length) + 3.366. Conclusion With larger PI ( 0) , with greater success of treatment with 2×4 appliances in Class Ⅲ malocclusion in mixed dentition, due to undeveloped maxilla is expected.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Objective To help clinicians make a decision on treatment plan of Class Ⅲ malocclusion with undeveloped maxilla in mixed dentition. Methods The sample included orthodontic treatment and orthopedic treatment groups, which consisted of 15 patients, respectively, with Class Ⅲ malocclusion due to undeveloped maxilla. The selection criteria included (1) Anterior crossbites (2 ) - 2 ANB 1 ( 3 ) Cephalometric analysis showed undeveloped maxilla and normal growth of the mandible (4) Growing patients (5) Mild Concave profile. Patients in orthodontic group were treated with 2×4 appliance and with stable treatment effects after two years follow - up. Patients in orthopedic group were treated with reverse headgear when failure or relapse was noted after treatment with 2×4 appliance within one year. Cephalometric analysis was performed with pretreatment lateral cephalograms. T - test was assessed to compare significant difference between the two groups. Discriminate analysis was performed and its result helped to select the treatment method to Class Ⅲ malocclusion in mixed dentition. Results The average value of NSAr was significantly smaller in orthodontic treatment group ( p 0.01) , anterior cranial base length ( p 0.001) and posterior cranial base length (p0.01) was significantly larger in orthodontic treatment group. Prediction Index (PI) = -0.2 (NSAr) + 0.243 (anterior cranial base length) + 0.187 (posterior cranial base length) + 3.366. Conclusion With larger PI ( 0) , with greater success of treatment with 2×4 appliances in Class Ⅲ malocclusion in mixed dentition, due to undeveloped maxilla is expected.

Key concepts: Medicine, Maxilla, Cephalometric analysis, Dentistry, Malocclusion, Orthodontics, Dentition, Case selection

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Preliminary Study on Methods Selection in Treatment of Class III Malocclusion in Mixed Dentition — Research Paper | ScholarLens