The aim of this randomized clinical trial was to assess differences in the effects of face mask and reverse chin cup therapy on maxillary deficient growing patients.
Methods
The sample consisted of 42 class III patients with maxillary deficiency randomly divided into two equal groups. Twenty-one patients (10 males and 11 females) with a mean age of 8·9 (SD: 1·4) years were treated with a face mask for 18 (SD: 2) months. Twenty-one patients (9 males and 12 females) with the mean age of 9·2 (SD: 1·1) years were treated with a reverse chin cup for 19 (SD: 4) months. Cephalometric radiographs were taken at the beginning and end of treatment and the cephalometric measurements were analysed. Paired t-tests and a Wilcoxon test were used for intra-group evaluations. Mann–Whitney test was used for inter-group evaluations.
Results
Sella–Nasion–A point (SNA) was increased by 1° (SD: 1·7°) (P<0·003) and 1·8° (SD: 1·7°) (P<0·001) in the face mask and reverse chin cup groups, respectively. The IMPA decreased by 4·1° (SD: 6·5°) in face mask group (P<0·009) and 3·1° (SD: 4·7°) in the reverse chin cup group (P<0·008). However, no statistically significant differences were seen in changes between the two groups.
Conclusion
Both face mask and reverse chin cup appliances are successful at moving the maxilla forward.
ProffitWR, FieldsHW, SarverDM. Orthodontic treatment planning: limitations, controversies, and special problems. In Proffit WR, Fields HW, Sarver DM (eds.). Contemporary Orthodontics. St Louis, MO: Mosby Elsevier, 2007; 268–327.
2.
ProffitWR, FieldsHW, Jr, MorayLJ. Prevalence of malocclusion and orthodontic treatment need in the United States: estimates from the NHANES III survey. Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg1998; 13: 97–106.
3.
IngervallB, MohlinB, ThilanderB.Prevalence and awareness of malocclusion in Swedish men. Comm Dent Oral Epidemiol1978; 6: 309–14.
4.
LewKK, FoongWC. Horizontal skeletal typing in an ethnic Chinese population with true Class III malocclusions. Br J Orthod1993; 20: 19–23.
5.
DelaireJ.Maxillary development revisited: relevance to the orthopaedic treatment of Class III malocclusions. Eur J Orthod1997; 19: 289–311.
6.
CevidanesL, BaccettiT, FranchiL, McNamaraJA, Jr, de ClerckH.Comparison of two protocols for maxillary protraction: bone anchors versus face mask with rapid maxillary expansion. Angle Orthod2010; 80: 799–806.
7.
BaekSH, KimKW, ChoiJY. New treatment modality for maxillary hypoplasia in cleft patients. Protraction facemask with miniplate anchorage. Angle Orthod2010; 80: 595–603.
8.
UlgenM, FiratliS.The effects of the Frankel's function regulator on the Class III malocclusion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop1994; 105: 561–67.
9.
AltugZ, ArslanAD. Skeletal and dental effects of a mini maxillary protraction appliance. Angle Orthod2006; 76: 360–68.
10.
KapustAJ, SinclairPM, TurleyPK. Cephalometric effects of face mask/expansion therapy in Class III children: a comparison of three age groups. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop1998; 113: 204–12.
11.
ShapiroPA, KokichVG. Treatment alternatives for children with severe maxillary hypoplasia. Eur J Orthod1984; 6: 141–47.
12.
SmalleyWM, ShapiroPA, HohlTH, KokichVG, BranemarkPI. Osseointegrated titanium implants for maxillofacial protraction in monkeys. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop1988; 94: 285–95.
13.
RachmielA, AizenbudD, ArdekianL, PeledM, LauferD.Surgically-assisted orthopedic protraction of the maxilla in cleft lip and palate patients. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg1999; 28: 9–14.
14.
TaeKC, GongSG, MinSK, OhSW. Use of distraction osteogenesis in cleft palate patients. Angle Orthod2003; 73: 602–07.
15.
ShowkatbakhshR, JamilianA.Treatment of a Class III patient: a case report. Aust Orthod J2011; 27: 69–73.
16.
JamilianA, ShowkatbakhshR.The effect of tongue appliance on the maxilla in Class III malocclusion due to maxillary deficiency. Int J Orthod Milwaukee2009; 20: 11–14.
17.
JamilianA, ShowkatbakhshR, BoushehryMB. The effect of tongue appliance on the nasomaxillary complex in growing cleft lip and palate patients. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent2006; 24: 136–39.
18.
ShowkatbakhshR, JamilianA.A novel method of maxillary deficiency treatment by tongue plate — a case report. Int J Orthod Milwaukee2011; 22: 31–34.
19.
DelaireJ, VerdonP, LumineauJP, Cherga-NegreaA, TalmantJ, BoissonM.[Some results of extra-oral tractions with front-chin rest in the orthodontic treatment of class 3 maxillomandibular malformations and of bony sequelae of cleft lip and palate]. Rev Stomatol Chir Maxillofac1972; 73: 633–42.
20.
CampbellPM. The dilemma of Class III treatment. Early or late?Angle Orthod1983; 53: 175–91.
21.
DelaireJ, VerdonP.[The use of heavy postero-anterior extraoral forces by an orthopedic mask in the treatment of dentomaxillary sequellae of labiomaxillopalatal clefts]. Chir Pediatr1983; 24: 315–22.
22.
NandaR.Biomechanical and clinical considerations of a modified protraction headgear. Am J Orthod1980; 78: 125–39.
23.
ShowkatbakhshR, JamilianA, BehnazM.Treatment of maxillary deficiency by miniplates: a case report. ISRN Surg2011; 20: 11.
24.
de ClerckHJ, CornelisMA, CevidanesLH, HeymannGC, TullochCJ. Orthopedic traction of the maxilla with miniplates: a new perspective for treatment of midface deficiency. J Oral Maxillofac Surg2009; 67: 2123–29.
25.
JamilianA, ShowkatbakhshR.Treatment of maxillary deficiency by miniscrew implants — a case report. J Orthod2010; 37: 56–61.
26.
JamilianA, HarajiA, ShowkatbakhshR, ValaeeN.The effects of miniscrew with Class III traction in growing patients with maxillary deficiency. Int J Orthod Milwaukee2011; 22: 25–30.
27.
ShowkatbakhshR, JamilianA.A novel approach in treatment of maxillary deficiency by reverse chin cup. Int J Orthod Milwaukee2010; 21: 27–31.
28.
YavuzI, HaliciogluK, CeylanI.Face mask therapy effects in two skeletal maturation groups of female subjects with skeletal Class III malocclusions. Angle Orthod2009; 79: 842–48.
29.
RamadanAA. Response of maxillary retrusion cases to face mask treatment. World J Orthod2008; 9: e29–34.
30.
GodtA, ZeyherC, Schatz-MaierD, GozG.Early treatment to correct Class III relations with or without face masks. Angle Orthod2008; 78: 44–49.
31.
PetrieA, BulmanJS, OsbornJF. Further statistics in dentistry. Part 4: Clinical trials 2. Br Dent J2002; 193: 557–61.
32.
EllisE, 3rd, McNamaraJA, Jr. Components of adult Class III open-bite malocclusion. Am J Orthod1984; 86: 277–90.
33.
ChaKS. Skeletal changes of maxillary protraction in patients exhibiting skeletal class III malocclusion: a comparison of three skeletal maturation groups. Angle Orthod2003; 73: 26–35.
34.
DellingerEL. A preliminary study of anterior maxillary displacement. Am J Orthod1973; 63: 509–16.
35.
KambaraT.Dentofacial changes produced by extraoral forward force in the Macaca irus. Am J Orthod1977; 71: 249–77.
36.
NandaR.Protraction of maxilla in rhesus monkeys by controlled extraoral forces. Am J Orthod1978; 74: 121–41.
37.
ProffitWR, FieldsHW. Treatment of skeletal problems in children. In Proffit WR, Fields HW, Sarver DM (eds.). Contemporary OrthodonticsSt Louis, MO: Mosby Elsevier, 2007, 495–511.
38.
HickhamJH, MiethkeRR. [Protraction–it's use and abuse]. Prakt Kieferorthop1991; 5: 115–32.
39.
FranchiL, BaccettiT, McNamaraJA. Postpubertal assessment of treatment timing for maxillary expansion and protraction therapy followed by fixed appliances. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop2004; 126: 555–68.
40.
NganPW, HaggU, YiuC, WeiSH. Treatment response and long-term dentofacial adaptations to maxillary expansion and protraction. Semin Orthod1997; 3: 255–64.
41.
Nartallo-TurleyPE, TurleyPK. Cephalometric effects of combined palatal expansion and facemask therapy on Class III malocclusion. Angle Orthod1998; 68: 217–24.
42.
HaggU, TseA, BendeusM, RabieAB. Long-term follow-up of early treatment with reverse headgear. Eur J Orthod2003; 25: 95–102.
