Treatment of Class III Malocclusions Using Temporary Anchorage Devices (TADs) the Alt RAMEC Protocol and Inermaxillary Class III Elastics in the Growing Patient

Treatment of Class III malocclusions using Temporary AnchorageDevices (TADs), the Alt-RAMEC protocol and intermaxillary Class III elastics in the growing patient. A Prospective Clinical Study Dr. Saad Al-Mozany BDS !"#$"%&"'()*+),-./*0*'."$#) 12$3&.4)*+)!('."#.-4) 5'"6(-#".4)*+)740'(4) 83#.-2&"2) ) ) ) ) 8)./(#"#)#39:"..(0)"')%2-."2&)+3&+"&:('.)*+)./()-(;3"-(:('.#)+*-)./()0(<-(()*+)!*$.*-)*+)=&"'"$2&) !('."#.-4)>,-./*0*'."$#?) ,$.*9(-)@ABB) 1 Dedication To my amazing girl, partner, friend and soul mate Joanne for all her support, understanding, patience and unconditional love over the last few years. I would not be here without you. To my parents for their unparalleled support and for being my backbone throughout my life. To my brothers in arms Riaan Foot, Johnathan Grove and Daniel Tan for you companionship and friendship throughout the last 3 years and for making this rocky journey a smooth one. And finally to my close friends and brothers Ali, Dhulshan and Beaumont for all the good times…. 2 Declaration Candidate Certification This is to certify that the candidate carried out the work in this thesis in the Department of Orthodontics, University of Sydney and has not been submitted to any other University or Institution for a higher degree. ……………………………………………………….. Dr. Saad A-H Ali Al-Mozany 3 Macquarie University for his assistance with the statistical analysis. Dr. University of Sydney for his assistance. Department of Orthodontics. Lecturer. Many thanks is expressed to the following: Professor M. Department of Orthodontics. SDH for the construction of the clinically demanding appliances at short notice with ease and professionalism. friendship and endless guidance throughout the duration of this research project. Department of Mathematical Sciences. Dr Peter Petocz.Acknowledgments Several people have been instrumental in allowing this thesis to be completed. Ms Maria Missikos. Oyku Dalci. Ms Natalie Dolnik and American Orthodontics for their generosity in the donation of the miniscrews and surgical equipment used for placement. University of Sydney and Dr. University of Sydney. Jose Mendez and Daniel Baek at the Orthodontic Laboratory. support. 4 . Dr. Carmen Gonzales. Dental Board of NSW for their financial support. Mr’s Steve Warczac. Nour Tarraf for their assistance and supervision throughout this research project. Ali Darendeliler. during the project The Australian Society of Orthodontists Foundation for Research and Education. Head of Department of Orthodontics. Senior Lecturer. .1(c) Diagnostic scheme for Class III malocclusions………………………...2 Characteristics…………………………………………………………………….3(a) Functional Regulator FR-III……………………………………34 5..3(b)i History………………………………………..3(b)ii Force magnitude and direction………………………………......7 2. Diagnosis and treatment planning…………………………………………………………..1(c) Characteristics of pseudo Class III malocclusions……………………..28 4.1(d) Profile analysis…………………………………………….2 Critical diagnostic criteria in the diagnosis of Class III malocclusions………….2(a) Inclined plane…………………………………………………………..1(b) Factors affecting the prognosis of early treatment………….15 3.3(b)v Stability of chin-cup therapy………………………….1(b) Functional assessment………………………………………………….3(b)iv Long term effects on the TMJ………………………………..2(c) Lingual arch with finger springs………………………………………..3 Treatment of skeletal Class III malocclusions…………………………………….3(b) Chin cap therapy and mandibular restraining………….…34 5.……………….37 5. Incidence……………………………………………………………………….26 4.32 5..1(a) Rational of early treatment in Class III malocclusions………..27 4.9 2.….….1 Class III growth……………………………………………………………………16 3.………..3 Aetiology………………………………………………………………………….31 5.………….27 4..29 5. Definition…………………………………………………………………………………….26 4.34 5. Introduction ………………………………………………………………………………….2(d) Removable appliances……………………………………………….34 5.11 2..1..38 5.3(b)iii Treatment timing and duration……………………………….……………….. Growth………………………………………………………………………………………16 3.…10 2.23 4..2(e) 2x4s and fixed appliances………………………………………….1 Early treatment of Class III malocclusion…………………………………………31 5.33 5.2(b) Tongue blade……………………………………………………………33 5.32 5.37 5.Table of Contents Dedication Acknowledgments Declaration Table of Contents 1.3(a) Functional appliances………………………………………………….31 5. Treatment of Class III malocclusion……………………………………………………….26 4.2 Early treatment of nonskeletal crossbite…………………………………………..1(a) Dental assessment…………………………………………………….39 5..33 5..34 5.2 Growth prediction…………………………………………………………………....39 5...40 5 .….………. 46 5.41 5.. dental and soft tissue effects…………………..3(c)i Indications and history………………………………………..60 References……………………………………………………………………………….3(c)iv Effects on the airway…………………………………..64 Future directions…………………………………………………………………………71 Appendix………………………………………………………………………….3(c)ix Stability of protraction facemask therapy………………….…..3(c) Protraction facemask therapy…………………………………...…….50 5.3(c)vi Timing of treatment………………………………....……....6 7 8 9 5.3(c)vii Duration of treatment and force magnitude…………………......46 5...49 5...41 5..3(c)x Prognosis of early Class III therapy…………………………..41 5.……45 5.3(d) Skeletal anchorage and maxillary protraction……………….48 5.….3(c)viii Protraction with or without rapid maxillary expansion……...3(c)ii Biomechanics……………………………………………..…………47 5...55 5.73 Manuscript………………………………………………………………………………90 6 .53 5.3(c)iii Skeletal.3(e) Alternate rapid maxillary expansion and constriction (AltRAMEC) for maxillary protraction……………………………………………………..3(c)v Effects on the TMJ………………………………….…. The recurring theme of the characteristic growth of the malocclusion is that it is not self-correcting and will worsen with time. prenormal. Therefore it may imply that the malocclusion is associated with a different manner of craniofacial growth when compared with normal occlusion. Many other descriptive terms have been used throughout the literature to denote the malocclusion such as mesial occlusion. form and position with respect to the maxilla and/ or cranial base1. A normal occlusion is generally characterised by a union of a balanced facial skeleton and harmony in the growth between the mandible. infraversion. In the 19th century. all the lower teeth occluded mesial to the normal width of one bicuspid or even more in extreme cases2”. but also due to the well recognized need for early intervention by both the public and dental professionals. Introduction The craniofacial anomaly we describe today as the Class III malocclusion was described as early as the 18th century by Bourdet who called “attention to the deformity in children with protruding chins”. macrognathic and mandibular overbite1. Angle first published his classification of malocclusion in 1899 in which he described Class III as “the relation of the jaws was abnormal. anteversion. progenic. This is not only because of the relatively low prevalence of this malocclusion in the different ethnic groups. maxilla and cranial base in size. There is a paucity of data on the growth characteristics of Class III malocclusions. Delabarre used the terms “edge-to-edge” and “underbite to describe the malocclusion. position and form.1. 7 . Class III malocclusions are characterised as a facial dysplasia produced by excessive growth disharmony of the mandible in size. Treatment of the Class III malocclusion poses a challenge to the clinician. The expansion is intended to open the circummaxillary sutures or “disarticulate” the maxilla to allow for its protraction. This eliminates the need for the cumbersome extraoral headgear appliance and the protraction is maintained full time.3 This involves using an extra-oral appliance for 14-16 hours per day. Protraction facemask with maxillary expansion has been advocated as one of the treatment modalities in the early treatment of Class III malocclusion. to camouflage orthodontic treatment to a combined orthognathic surgical and orthodontic approach. The timing of treatment varies from early intervention during the pre-pubertal stages of growth. The treatment modalities range from dentofacial orthopaedic treatment. to intervention after the patient has completed their active growth. An elaboration of this procedure where the maxilla is alternately expanded and constricted (Alt-RAMEC) has been demonstrated to produce a more pronounced “disarticulation” effect allowing for a greater amount of maxillary protraction in a considerably reduced time4. This has been demonstrated to produce both dental and skeletal effects to correct the malocclusion. The recent incorporation of skeletal anchorage into the discipline of orthodontics has led to their utilization in the orthopedic treatment of Class III malocclusions. The recent advances in the treatment of Class III malocclusions to “disarticulate” the maxilla and the recent invent of skeletal anchorage has culminated in my research of the use of skeletal 8 . Recently surgical plates have been placed in the maxilla and mandible and intermaxillary Class III elastics have been worn full time to protract the maxilla5. Sassouni: Class III malocclusion can be defined as the unfavorable presence of characteristics of the open-bite and deep. 3. Definition Class III malocclusions have been described by numerous authors. 2. In common with the deep bite type. These include: 1. even in the absence of dimensional disproportions. therefore. the skeletal Class III has a small cranial base angle which brings the glenoid fossa (and. all the lower teeth occluded mesial to the normal width of one bicuspid or even more in extreme cases2. 9 . It has nothing to do with the maxillary and mandibular skeletal bases. The mandible is more typical of the open-bite type with a large gonial angle.British classification: This definition relies on the incisor relationship where the lower incisal edge meets anterior to the cingulum plateau of the palatal surface of the upper incisors6. or both 7. when present together.Angle: the relation of the jaws was abnormal. This usually brings the maxillary molar to a higher level. The result of this set of deviations. the condyles) more anteriorly relative to sella turcica.bite types. The palate is characteristically tipped upward at PNS and downward at ANS. This classification is a phenotypic description that utilizes the first molars and the canines as its critena. 2. a mandibular protrusion.anchorage in conjunction with the Alt-RAMEC disarticulation protocol and intermaxillary Class III elastics in the treatment of Class III malocclusions in the growing patient. is conducive to a maxillary retrusion. 7% to 7. These variations in the prevalence of the malocclusion in the different ethnic groups has led to 10 .3% to 13% respectively. There has also been a reported increase in prevalence of Class III malocclusion in the Saudi Arabian.2%11-13 with a slightly higher prevalence in men of Swedish descent which has been reported to be as high as 6%13. The prevalence of Class III malocclusion has also been investigated for the European American and African American populations and has been estimated as 0.8% and 0. These patterns may be indicative characteristics of a Class III malocclusion and have been estimated to range between 2. Class III malocclusions are especially common in patients of Asian ancestry.4% and 2.2.1 Incidence The incidence of Class III malocclusions differs between different ethnic groups.2% respectively14. The incidence of Class III malocclusions in the Japanese populations has not been investigated in detail. In comparison to people of Asian or Middle Eastern ancestry. Numerous studies have investigated the incidence rates for the differing population groups.4 %10.6-1.8% to 4. As indicated by these studies the prevalence of Class III malocclusion has a racial predilection with the highest prevalence being in individuals of Asian ancestry and the lowest prevalence being in individuals of European ancestry. The estimates of the malocclusion in these populations ranges from 0. The prevalence of Class III malocclusion in the Chinese population has been estimated as high as 12%8. Instead estimates of prevalence in the Japanese population of anterior crossbite and edge to edge relationships have been established. Middle Eastern population as high as 9. Class III malocclusions are seen less often in people of Northern European ancestry. If the frequency of occurrence of these two manifestations of Class III malocclusion are combined then a substantial percentage of the Japanese population has characteristics of Class III malocclusion9. Numerous investigators have demonstrated that various types of skeletal patterns may exist in those with a Class III malocclusion. mandible. the position of the temporomandibular articulation and any displacement of the lower jaw will affect both the sagittal and vertical relationships of the teeth. This designation ipso facto labelled the mandible as the culprit or the aberrant component of the patient’s craniofacial presentation. Mandibular prognathism may be present in individuals with a Class III malocclusion but this represents only one part of the spectrum of the different components of the malocclusion. 33%: Maxillary retrusion was present without mandibular prognathism. 11 . with the maxilla within the normal range of protrusion. in isolation or so as to cancel each other out. Therefore various different combination or anomalies in these components can culminate in the presentation of a Class III malocclusion. an individual exhibiting a Class III malocclusion was diagnosed routinely as having mandibular prognathism. Sanborn1 in his study of 42 adult individuals of both sexes. maxilla. 2.5 %: Actual mandibular protrusion.2 Characteristics In the early days of Orthodontics. The characteristics of Class III malocclusion involve the entire facial complex with factors acting synergistically. identified the following characteristics of the Class III malocclusion: 42.differences in the research data which is being produced with regards to the malocclusion in various parts of the world. The size and relative positions of the cranial base. 19.5%: Combination of maxillary retrusion and mandibular prognathism.5%: Maxillary retrusion with normal mandibular prominence. Dietrich 15 studied the cephalometric variables of Class III malocclusions in the permanent dentition and found: 37. 19. 14%: Normal protrusion of maxilla and mandible. Ellis16 in his cephalometric sample of 302 adult patients of both sexes found: 30%: Combination of maxillary retrusion and mandibular protrusion. Jacobson13 in his sample of 149 patients of both sexes reported on sex differences and between child and adult Class III cases and found: 49%: Mandibular protrusion with normal maxillae. the Class III maxillae were both 12 . 26%: Maxillary retrusion with normal mandible.5%: Maxillary retrusion without mandibular prognathism. 31%: Mandibular protrusion with a normal maxilla. 9. Guyer 17 in his cephalometric sample of 144 children. 24%: Maxilla and mandible within the normal range of prominences.5%: Both the maxillary and mandibular positions within normal range.1%: Mandibular protrusion with a normal maxilla.9. demonstrated that the posterior cranial base length was considerably longer in Class III subjects. with a specific increase in the mandibular body length with the mandibular articulation more ventrally placed. Chang20 in his sample of 40 Class III Chinese children in the deciduous dentition also demonstrated that the skeletal components of the Class III malocclusion which differed from the Class I controls included a significant increase in the mandibular length in association with a more forward position of the mandible. Her sample consisted of 69 Class III subjects and she compared this to a sample of Class I malocclusions. Tollaro19 also investigated the morphological characteristics of the Class III malocclusion in the deciduous dentition. Proff 21 in a retrospective study on 21 basicranial variables of 54 Class III subjects with a sample of 54 match controls. an overall mandibular length excess. which he attributed to a shorter maxillary length. The Class III effective length of the mandible was longer and more prognathic compared to the Class I controls. concluded that mandibular length relative to anterior cranial base length is 13 . a shorter maxilla that was more retrusive. She found that the anterior cranial base was significantly reduced in Class III children with an increase in the length of the mandibular ramus and the body in the Class III sample compared to the control sample. Battagel18 studied the cephalometric characteristics retrospectively in her sample of 495 children both male and female.generally more retrusive and shorter. She confirmed the multifactorial aeitiology of Class III malocclusion as a reduction in the cranial base angle. The maxilla was slightly backwards in his Class III sample. The reduction in total cranial base length results from various minor local changes rather than a shortening of the anterior and/or posterior cranial base legs. whereas maxillary length is not consistently affected. Not many studies are available in the literature regarding the transverse dimension and Class III characteristics. Finally it was concluded that the cranial base flexure is clearly more prominent in Class III individuals. the so-called orthocephalisation. A developmental disorder in the posterior cranial fossa area was suggested to account for the aberrant cranial base morphology in skeletal Class III22. 14 . Franchi 25 undertook a study comparing the transverse dimension in both Class II and Class III. The results indicated that subjects with Class II or Class III malocclusion exhibit significant size and shape differences in craniofacial configuration in the frontal plane when compared with subjects with normal occlusions. The reduction in skeletal width of the maxilla was associated with an increase in vertical height. Since cranial base angulation depends on variations of either leg 24 the deficient horizontalisation hypothesis suggesting insufficient dorsal orientation of the posterior cranial base leg is not supported by increased bending of the cranial base alone. These size and shape differences mainly involved the contraction of the maxilla. both at the skeletal and dentoalveolar levels and a narrowing of the base of the nose. This precocious synostosis with deficient proliferation in the petro-spheno-occipital cartilages.increased in Class III subjects. physiologic horizontalisation of the cranial base (angle) during ontogenesis. but only in association with marked size and shape differences of the posterior cranial base and anterior displacement of the condyles. is considered incomplete23. The Class III sample consisted of 20 subjects of both sexes and standard posteroanterior cephalometric analysis in addition to a TPS (Thin-Plate-Spline) analysis was conducted and compared to a control group of Class I subjects. protruding lower lip and the characteristic “Hapsburg nose” with its prominent dorsal hump. the former Austro-Hungarian royal family. The distinctive facial feature of this family was the prognathic lower jaw.Therefore in summation the craniofacial characteristics of the Class III malocclusion may be attributed to both a positional and a dimensional disharmony of numerous components of the craniofacial skeleton involving the cranial base. Therefore genetics seems to play a distinctive role in the expression of the Class III malocclusion. The few studies of human inheritance and its role in Class III malocclusion support the belief that growth and size of the mandible are determined by hereditary. Litton26 studied the families of 51 individuals with severe Class III anomalies and found that one third of the group had a parent who presented with a Class III malocclusion and one sixth had an affected sibling. the maxilla and/or the mandible.3 Aeitiology The aeitiology of Class III malocclusion can be categorised are either genetic or environmental in origin. 2. 15 . The most well known example of this is the Hapsburg family. for whom records were available. Of the 40 members of the family. 33 showed prognathic mandibles13. The advent of the retrusive Class III pattern in Cleft lip and Palate patients may be due to the scarring affect of the lip and palatal repair. Although the midface deficiency that is characteristic of these craniofacial syndromes has been attributed to environmental factors. Some environmental causes that have also been attributed include patients with chromosomal defects including Cleft lip and palate patients and certain syndromes such as Achondroplasia. The prevalence of Class III malocclusions in these populations is low. The 16 . These consist of classical growth studies.Environmental influences such as mouth breathing and forward posture of the mandible have also been associated with the aetiology of Class III malocclusion. it should be noted that these syndromes are the result of an underlying chromosomal. Aperts syndrome and Crouzons syndrome. Growth 3. The large North American longitudinal growth studies mainly consist of untreated individuals of Class I and II malocclusions due to the high prevalence of these malocclusions in that ethnic group. which has the effect of restricting the anteroposterior and transverse maxillary development. longitudinal data of untreated Class III individuals. Aperts and Crouzons syndrome are generally characterized by premature synostosis of the cranial sutures restricting maxillary growth. as described previously. 3. and therefore deductions on the trends of Class III growth cannot be made from these studies. However a simple environmental cause appears unlikely with the main aeitiology being genetic in nature.1 Class III growth There are three methods of evaluating facial growth in individuals diagnosed as having a Class III malocclusion. genetic defect and should therefore be classified as of genetic origin. and cross-sectional data from untreated Class III samples27. Chong32 used 13 children’s records which consisted of a combination of cephalometric records and study models from both the Burlington Growth Study at the University of Toronto and the Bolton-Brush Growth Study at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland. Ohio in an attempt to quantify Class III growth in the white population. The sample was divided into early and late mixed dentition groups. Baccetti3 conducted an investigation on 32 untreated Class III individuals from the University of Florence. investigators have attempted to contribute to the knowledge of Class III facial growth trends by assembling small groups of orthodontically untreated Class III individuals for use as control groups when evaluating treatment effects27. Firstly this is due to the relatively low frequency of the malocclusion. 31. but unfortunately no major longitudinal investigations have been performed in relation to untreated Class III malocclusions. the maxillary length increased slightly more than 1mm/year. Secondly. Therefore the mandible exhibited more growth than the maxilla in this group. the lower anterior facial height increased more than 1mm/year and the mandibular length increased by less than 3mm/year. Italy.best method of studying facial growth and development is through longitudinal data. Both samples 17 . In response to this. especially in white populations.5 years. The reason for this deficiency in the literature is two-fold. The records suggested that between the ages of 6 and 11. The pioneers of this research have investigated mainly Asian populations28-30 but recently collection of longitudinal data of Class III growth from European populations has arisen3. that is recognized by both the public and dental professionals. it is due to the well established need for early intervention in this malocclusion. McDonald33 demonstrated similar results. The sample was divided into 4 groups on the basis of chronological age. therefore this methodology restricts the applicability of the outcomes to other Class III individuals meeting the same inclusion criteria27. coupled with a greater forward movement on the mandible in the Class III group. He reported that the difference in craniofacial form was present in all 4 age groups which is indicative that the characteristics of excessive lower facial height. The weaknesses in the aforementioned studies include. They also do not include any mention of the skeletal maturation or pubertal growth spurt in their samples. Point A was seen to advance at a rate of 1mm/year whereas mandibular length was seen to increase by 4. Guyer17 investigated lateral cephalograms from 144 Class III children between the ages of 5 and 15 years in an attempt to characterize them at different developmental ages. dentoalveolar compensations. The results demonstrated significantly less forward movement of A point. maxillary retrusion and mandibular prognathism was established as early as 5 18 . This was then compared with the Bolton Standards. the small sample size and/or the limited observational period.5 mm/year. Serial cephalometric radiographs of Class III subjects were gathered from private orthodontics practices in the United States.displayed deficient maxillary advancement and excessive mandibular growth. 27 individuals who had not undertaken orthodontic treatment were assembled and compared to a sample of matched subjects from the Michigan Growth study. The experimental group consisted of 18 girls and the control group consisted of 22 girls.The fundamental configuration of the mandibular prognathism seems to be established in early life. 5.The total growth increment of the oversized prognathic mandible is about the same as that of the normal mandible and did not indicate any peculiar growth spurt of either the mandible or the maxilla during the period studied. its annual growth increment and velocity shows a manner of change fairly similar to those of the normal face before puberty. 3. 4. Mitani28 analysed the growth changes in the face associated with mandibular prognathism during a period before puberty in a sample of Japanese girls. The study consisted of both males 19 . show a manner of increase relatively similar to that of the normal face before puberty.Neither growth of the maxillary length nor its positional advancement takes place to catch up with or adjust to the oversized prognathic mandible in the face during the period studied.The incremental changes in size attainment of the prognathic mandible . Miani 30 also studied the growth changes of the Japanese face associated with mandibular prognathism during 3 years after the pubertal growth peak. 2. His study demonstrated the following: 1. once established. Serial lateral cephalograms were taken in a 4 year series from 7 to 10 years of age.as well as the retropositioned maxilla. He also found that the early established Class III characteristics tended to worsen with time.years of age.That the mandibular prognathism is associated with a retropositioned maxilla of normal size. She also noted an increase in lower anterior facial height and dentoalveolar compensations beginning at 11 years of age.Morphological characteristics of mandibular prognathism that are established before the pubertal growth peak do not change fundamentally and are maintained thereafter. in which the mandible is oversized and prognathic but the maxilla is within the normal range of size and position. The largest growth increment of change in males was demonstrated to 20 . 2. She was in agreement with Mitani and Guyer in that the signs of Class III skeletal imbalance were present during the deciduous dentition. This involved 69 Class III subjects and 60 Class I subjects. Neither excessive nor retarded growth occurs in any part of the face after the pubertal growth peak 3. Tollaro19 conducted a cross sectional study of Class III craniofacial development. Battagel18 conducted a retrospective study on 495 lateral cephalograms consisting of 285 Class III subjects and 210 control subjects of Caucasian origin. With continued development males demonstrated less forward growth of the maxilla and a more vertical growth pattern than their control counterparts. She reported that Class III male subjects of all age groups demonstrated a retrusive maxillae and prominent mandibular positions relative to their control counterparts. Both groups were in the primary dentition.The Class III face.and females and each group consisted of a 3 year interval set of lateral head films. shows a manner of growth change fairly similar to that of the normal face after the pubertal growth peak. Results of the study was as follows: 1.The total growth increment of each component of the prognathic face is about the same as that of the normal face. females demonstrated more prominent mandibles. the mandible was protrusive from an early age and became increasingly prognathic with age. suggesting a peak growth in this age interval (14 and 17 years of age). The lower anterior facial height also increased with age. Baccetti27 has carried out both longitudinal and cross-sectional studies on Class III growth.9 years of age. This study also highlighted that a sexual dimorphism exists between female and male Class III growth.7 to 47.5 and 12 years but continued after the age of 15 years. in that the maxilla assumed a more retrusive position early in development and retained a fairly constant anteroposterior relationship to the cranial base structures with continued development. Compared to their controls.be between the last 2 age groups. The progressive closure of the cranial base angle also 21 . Miyajima9 has conducted the largest cross-sectional study on Class III growth involving 1376 females of Japanese origin ranging from 2. In his longitudinal study of 22 untreated Class III patients he reported a clear indication that the skeletal imbalances in a Class III malocclusion. Concurrently. To date. The maximum change for facial characteristics occurred between the average ages of 9. more proclined maxillary incisors and similar lower anterior facial heights. The results of this study were congruent with those of most other growth studies. In fact. Females were demonstrated to present a different growth pattern from males. he showed that the disharmony became more pronounced in the pubertal peak and continues until cervical maturation is complete according to the CVS method of cervical skeletal maturation34. The subjects were divided into groups based on dental developmental stage. is established early in life and is not self correcting during development. maxillomandibular differential. but the prescence of a reduced cranial base flexure and advanced position of the glenoid fossa were confirmed as anatomical characteristics of Class III malocclusions throughout the cervical maturational stages. The transition from C4 to C5 revealed a statistically significant increase for total mandibular length. The transition from CS3 to CS4 revealed statistically significant increases in total mandibular length. In the Class III females. upper and lower anterior facial heights. The sexual dimoprphic characteristics were present to a significant degree especially after the age of 13 years where female subjects with a Class III malocclusion present with significantly smaller linear dimension in the maxilla. and the protrusion of the lower lip in relation to the E plane. No statistical significant changes were seen in the cranial base angle during the different maturational stages. mandible and anterior facial heights when compared with male subjects during the circumpubertal and postpubertal periods. a growth trend similar to the males was observed despite sexual dimorphism being present in Class III growth35. and dentoalveolar heights at the upper molar and lower incisor. and dentoalveolar height at the upper molar and lower incisor. Finally the transition from C5 to C6 exhibited a statistically significant increase in the position of the chin in relation to Nasion-Perpendicular.worsened the malocclusion substantially18. Reyes36 conducted a study to estimate the growth in Class III malocclusion by means of the analysis of a large population of 492 males and 457 females. upper and lower anterior facial heights. He concluded that increases in mandibular length was substantially larger in Class III subjects than in normal subjects with 22 . maxillomandibular differential. In males the transitions from CS1 to CS2 to CS3 were accompanied by no statistical difference of any of the examined cephalometric variables. Baccetti’s cross-sectional study consisted of 1091 subjects of both sexes. normal occlusion even during the more mature age interval (15 to 16 years). A posterior growth direction was associated with a large height. small ratio and a large symphyseal angle. Using the Rocky Mountain 23 .1 Growth prediction The prediction of Class III growth can play an important part in the diagnosis and treatment planning of these cases. The study used molar relationship. He stated that the grid may provide a simple introduction to growth prediction. Although numerous authors have attempted to predict growth in these subjects both quantitatively and qualitatively. 3. large ratio. Schulhoff39 studied 14 skeletal Class III patients to predict which ones grew more in the mandible than in the cranial base. and a small angle of the symphysis. however the drawback is that this system does not fit a random series of patients. none of these have been of significant value to date. Johnston 37 proposed the “forcast grid” method which is a simplified method of generating long term forcasts of growth that employed a mean change expansion of a few cephalometric landmarks. Certain other cephalometic characteristics have been employed by other authors to predict the direction of future mandiblular growth. large depth. small depth. cranial deflection. They indicated that a mandible with anterior growth direction was associated with a small height. porion location and ramus positions to predict normal or abnormal growth. Aki 38 proposed the use of the morphology of the symphysis to predict this growth. Lower anterior facial height was also larger in Class III individuals during the late developmental stages. They then tested the accuracy on a group of patients and compared it to other prediction methods. However. The study found not one morphological trait indicative of potential Class III development could be isolated because the study clearly demonstrated the existence of different skeletal combinations to the malocclusion. Ghiz and coworkers found that the position of the mandible. could predict success or failure of early treatment42. Chen41 introduced a simple regression equation which was based on the CVMS to predict mandibular growth potential in Class III patients. if the sum of the deviations was greater than four. They reported the accuracy of this prediction to be 70-80 %. the corpus length. can predict successful outcomes with 95% degree of accuracy43. 24 . the ramal length. Franchi and coworkers found the inclination of the condylar head. the prediction formula can only accurately diagnose unsuccessful cases with only a 70% degree of accuracy. the maxillomandibular vertical relationship together with the width of the mandibular arch.Data System. then the computer will warn the Orthodontist of excess mandibular growth. and the gonial angle. using a single cephalogram. They found that the equation was accurate in predicting mandibular growth potential. Williams40 investigated the morphological characteristics in the craniofacial skeletal of an 11 year old child that could indicate the potential development of a Class III pattern. or whether a surgical intervention is necessary when growth is completed.Ngan proposes the use of a growth treatment response vector to predict whether patients who have had early protraction facemask therapy in the mixed dentition will require either a second phase of orthodontic camouflage or orthognathic surgery. The conclusion from growth prediction of Class III growth remains that a reproducible. patients and parents should be informed that any treatment even if successful is still hostage to future growth and that results may relapse and surgery or camouflage treatment has to remain the potential final treatment option. The patient will then be treated with maxillary expansion and a protraction facemask to eliminate the anterior crossbite. 25 . Before any treatment. A GTRV analysis will then be performed during the early permanent dentition to allow clinicians to decide whether the malocclusion can be camouflaged by orthodontic treatment. CO/CR discrepancy. As mentioned previously the Class III growth pattern is established early in life and family history and hereditary are good indicators for potential severe Class III patterns. The patient is followed for 3 to 4 years for growth observation. The diagnostic procedure is usually performed during the early mixed dentition once a patient is diagnosed with maxillary deficiency. simple and generic technique for growth prediction to a clinically valuable degree still remains to be established. and Class III malocclusion and to maximize the growth potential of the nasomaxillary complex. He suggests the use of serial cephalometric radiographs of patients taken a few years apart after facemask treatment and the use of a Growth Treatment Response Vector (GTVR) analysis to individualize and enhance the success of predicting excessive mandibular growth in Class III patients.44 The problem with this method is that early intervention has already been performed. a compensated Class III malocclusion is suspected (i.4. To differentiate a dental from a skeletal crossbite. the following diagnostic scheme can be adapted. 46 4. occlusal interferences (functional). together with retroclined mandibular incisors. Diagnosis and treatment planning Anterior crossbite is defined as a malocclusion resulting from the lingual position of the maxillary anterior teeth in relationship to the mandibular anterior teeth45. Patients who present with a forward shift of the mandible on closure may have a Class I skeletal pattern.e. Elimination of CR-CO shift should reveal whether it is a simple Class I malocclusion or a 26 . but a Class III skeletal and dental pattern in centric occlusion. Anterior positioning of the mandible may result from abnormal tooth contact that forces the mandible forward. Anterior crossbite in the primary dentition may be due to the abnormal inclination of the maxillary and mandibular incisors. If a positive overjet or end-to-end incisal relationship is found.. 4. a situation referred to as pseudo Class III malocclusion. and Class I molar relation in centric relation. If a negative overjet is found.1(a) Dental assessment: Check if the Class III molar relationship is accompanied by a negative overjet. upper incisors are proclined and lower incisors are retroclined to compensate for the skeletal discrepancy).1(b) Functional Assessment: Assess the relationship of the maxilla to the mandible to determine whether a centric relation/centric occlusion (CR-CO) discrepancy exists. proceed to the functional assessment. or skeletal discrepancies of the maxilla and/or mandible. normal facial profile. • Retroclined upper incisors and normal lower incisors. Is the overall profile convex.1(d) Profile analysis: Turley 48 recommended evaluation of the overall facial proportions. • Forward position of the mandible with normal mandibular length. • Decreased midface length. or concave? Is the maxilla retruded or is the mandible protruded? By blocking out the upper and lower lips.1(c) Characteristics of pseudoclass III: Rabie 47 identified the diagnostic characteristics of pseudo–Class III malocclusion as follows: • 75% showed no family history. • Class I molar and canine relationships in CO and Class II or end-to-end relationship at CR. evaluate the midface. and midface profile. evaluate the chin relative position to the nose and upper face. 27 .compensated Class III malocclusion. 4. There should be a convexity or an imaginary line extending from the inferior border of the orbit through the alar base of the nose down to the corner of the mouth. On the other hand. chin position. 46 4. straight. a patient with no shift on closure most likely has a true Class III malocclusion. A straight or concave tissue contour indicates a midface deficiency. Is the chin retruded or protruded? By blocking out the lower lip and chin. 4.1(e)Diagnostic scheme for dental and skeletal anterior crossbites.CO shift True class III malocclusion Pseudo class III malocclusion Eliminate CO-CR shift Class I molar relationship Class III molar relationship Class I malocclusion 28 . Dental Assessment (Molar relation & overjet) Class III molar relationship Negative overjet Class III molar relationship Positive overjet or end to end incisal relation with retroclined mandibular incisors Functional assessment Compensated Class III malocclusion No CR-CO Shift CR. several factors must be taken into consideration. Is the SAGITTAL discrepancy: -dental/dentoalveolar -skeletal Or mixed dental and skeletal in nature 2. Is there a VERTICAL discrepancy associated: -open bite (vertical) skeletal pattern -deep bite (horizontal) skeletal pattern 29 .2 Critical diagnostic criteria in evaluating Class III malocclusions When evaluating a Class III malocclusion. If a SKELETAL Discrepancy exists which jaw is at fault: -maxillary deficiency -mandibular protrusion -or is it a combination of mandibular protrusion and maxillary retrusion 3. These include: 1.4. SEVERITY of the jaw discrepancy -severe -moderate -mild 6. 30 . Is there a HEREDITARY component i.4. family history of Class III 7. the correct treatment modality should be employed as dental and skeletal crossbites are treated by different means. Is there a TRANSVERSE discrepancy associated: -skeletal -dental -or a combination of both 5. Age and growth potential of the patient 8. Presence or absence of a functional shift Once these diagnositic questions have been answered.e. Class III malocclusion with an anterior crossbite is often accompanied by a functional shift.5. Treatment of Class III malocclusion 5. early correction of the transverse dimension and 31 . leading to thinning of the labial alveolar plate and/or gingival recession.To improve occlusal function. In mild and moderate Class III patients. Class III malocclusion is often accompanied with an anterior crossbite. Early orthopedic treatment using facemask or chin cup therapy Class III malocclusion improves the skeletal relationships. 3. Early orthopedic treatment may help in eliminating centric occlusion/centric relation (CO/ CR) discrepancies and avoid adverse growth potential. which in turn minimize excessive dental compensation such as over closure of the mandible and retroclination of the mandibular incisors. Even if surgery is eventually needed. Excessive mandibular growth is often accompanied by dental compensation of the mandibular incisors. 4. early orthodontic or orthopedic treatment may eliminate the necessity for orthognathic surgery treatment. dental compensation of mandibular incisors. The aims of early treatment may include the following44: 1.1 Early treatment of Class III malocclusion 5. 2.To simplify phase II comprehensive treatment. Uncorrected anterior crossbite may lead to abnormal wear of the lower incisors.To improve skeletal discrepancies and provide a more favorable environment for future growth.To prevent progressive irreversible soft tissue or bony changes.1(a) Rational of early treatment in Class III malocclusions The rationale for early treatment of Class III malocclusions is to create a favorable environment for future dentofacial development to occur49. good co-operation. These children are seen as being “mean” or “ugly”. 5. even after undergoing corrective surgery50.1(b) Factors affecting the prognosis of early treatment Campbell 52 reviewed guidelines developed by Turpin 53 in his unpublished thesis for the interceptive treatment of Class III malocclusion. The negative factors included a divergent facial type. Consequently they develop negative. no familial prognathism and good facial aesthetics. self-deprecating attitudes and low self esteem. The positive factors include convergent facial type.maximizing the growth potential of the maxilla may minimize the extent of the surgical procedures. mild skeletal disharmony. are harassed. symmetrical condylar growth. 51. Turpin had divided patients into those who had positive factors and those who had negative factors. He advocated early treatment of the patients who had positive factors and advocated delaying treatment until growth has ceased in those patients who had negative factors.2 Early treatment of non-skeletal anterior crossbites The treatment of non skeletal crossbites is aimed at placing the anterior dentition into their correct anteroposterior relationships. which they then carry into adulthood. 5. asymmetrical growth. The developing Class III malocclusion generally irreversibly affects the dentofacial appearance. bullied and rejected. AP functional shift. poor co-operation.To provide more pleasing facial aesthetics. It involves the movement of the dental elements only and is 32 . no growth remaining. 5. no AP shift. established familial prognathic growth pattern and poor facial aesthetics. young with growth remaining. severe skeletal disharmony. thus improving the psychosocial development of a child. 5. The finger springs with helices can be soldered to the lingual arch and can be used to correct the anterior crossbite.done under the premise that the skeletal relationships are normal. The disadvantage is the production of an unpredictable force on the ramp which can potentially produce more root resorption due to the heavy.2(a) Inclined Plane This appliance is a non compliant appliance that is cemented into place.2(c) Lingual Arch with Finger Springs A maxillary lingual arch can be constructed with finger springs to procline the upper incisors. especially as the teeth are erupting. It may also interfere with speech. 33 . The use of this is best made during the mixed to permanent dentition. this appliance can correct the malocclusion rapidly with no patient compliance. However.2(b) Tongue Blade This can be used for the correction of single teeth that are in crossbite. The disadvantage of a tongue blade is that it is unpredictable and depends heavily on patient compliance. irregular forces placed on the teeth. 5. Several intraoral appliances have been advocated for the correction including: 5. The advantage of this treatment modality is that it does not rely on patient compliance.3 Treatment of skeletal Class III malocclusion 5. mixed and early permanent dentition stages in the treatment of Class III malocclusions characterised by maxillary skeletal 34 .3(a)i Functional Regulator FR-III In the 1960s the introduction of the Frankel appliance gained popularity for the treatment of Class III malocclusions. 5. It has also been advocated to extrude the anterior dentition slightly to achieve an increase in overbite for better retention of the correction. The disadvantage is that the appliance is limited to tipping the teeth and still relies heavily on patient compliance.2(d) Removable Appliances These appliances can be fabricated with a Z-spring or expansion screw to exert a labial force on one or more maxillary incisors.5. This allows the operator to procline the incisors in a timely and predictable fashion. The addition of a posterior bite plate can also be made to open the bite in facilitation of the bite correction. The stability of this treatment has been studied by Haag in a 5 year follow up study which found that all patients retained a positive overjet54. This appliance can then be used as a retainer to maintain the correction.2(e) 2x4s and Fixed Appliances Non skeletal dentoalveolar anterior crossbites can also be treated effectively and predictably with 2 x 4. 5. 2 x 2 or mini 2 x 4 fixed appliances.3(a) Functional Appliances 5. The appliance was used in the primary. retrusion and not mandibular prognathism. Frankel supports the theory that the soft tissue matrix. Cephalometric evaluation revealed a significant decrease in SNB angle and an increase in ANB angle. interpremolar. nose prominence. and intercanine width of the maxilla and of palatal height after treatment. an increase in intermolar and intercanine width and a decrease in lower arch depth were observed. He theorises that the apical extension of the shield into the vestibule places tension on the buccinator’s muscle fibers and dentoalveolar periosteum stimulating bone deposition. Concerning the mandible. overjet. There was an increase in upper lip thickness and a decrease in lower lip convexity observed after treatment. Kalavritinos56 studied the effects of the Frankel appliance on 14 growing patients and found there was a significant increase in intermolar. facial convexity.55 The design of the appliance was a modified activator with the presence of vestibular shields and upper labial pads whose function was to counteract the forces of the surrounding muscles that restrict forward maxillary skeletal development and retrude maxillary tooth position. thus stimulating maxillary alveolar development and restricting mandibular alveolar development. has an important influence on dental structure development. formed by the cheeks. He then describes that there was “favourable” functional and aesthetic maxillary and mandibular positioning after treatment but does not make any definitive statement regarding the promotion of maxillary growth. The vestibular shields stand away from the alveolar process of the maxilla but fit closely in the mandible. lips and tongue. 35 . This is termed the “periostal tension hypothesis”. and lower soft tissue face height. the decrease in the SNB angle with a subsequent increase of the ANB angle. His results were in accordance with Ulgen and McNamara in that the correction of the Class III malocclusion was mainly due to a backward and downward rotation of the mandible coupled with a linguoversion of the mandibular incisors with little effect on maxillary growth promotion. The overbite decreased due largely to the downward and backward rotation of the mandible57. it has been shown to be effective as 36 . Variable responses in the maxilla were noted. He described 2 common findings in all three patients. He found that as a result of FR appliance therapy in the functional Class III malocclusion group. the negative overjet that was present at the beginning of the treatment has been converted into a positive overjet by an average increase of 3. Ulgen57 studied the effects of the Frankel appliance on 40 patients consisting of 20 Class III patients and 20 controls. The increase in the SNA angle and the protrusion of the upper incisors were found to be insignificant.McNamara55 in 3 case reports of slightly different morphological facial Class III types. Baik58 also studied the effects of the Frankel appliance on 30 preadolescent Class III children with a match control sample. Although there is conflicting evidence in the literature with regards to the mode of action of the Frankel appliance in the correction of Class III malocclusion.8 mm at the end of the treatment. These were a forward movement of the maxillary dentition and a redirection of mandibular growth in a vertical direction. and the retrusion of the lower incisors were effective in the increase of the overjet. The sum of downward and backward rotation of the mandible. described a different effect on the craniofacial skeleton. He advocated the use of chincap therapy in young patients where he concluded that with chin-cup therapy.a retention appliance following other treatment modalities such as protraction headgear treatment. These early attempts to correct mandibular prognathism tended to fail for two reasons. First. treatment was often commenced after facial skeletal growth was completed. the forces generated by appliances in the 1800’s were usually too small to have an influence on condylar growth mechanisms. Angle boldly stated that he no longer used it with subsequent journals of the 20th century having little or no reference to the treatment modality. there is a change in craniofacial pattern leading to the observed resolution of the Angle skeletal Class III malocclusion and that his study provides 37 . Graber59 concluded that the inappropriate force levels and little understanding of facial growth led to the shortcomings of the treatment modality and reduction in the number of Class III cases treated with chincap therapy. Cellier in France and Fox. In 1907. leaving the practitioner with the task of literally “driving” the mandible backward in the craniofacial complex. There was no clinical concept of growth guidance. 5. all designed appliances that resemble today’s chin cup.3(b)i History The use of restraining devices to reduce mandibular prognathism was reported in the early 1800’s. The early failure with the chin cup appliance was one of the reasons that orthodontists turned to intraoral appliances with intermaxillary elastics in an attempt to correct the Class III problem59.3 (b) Chincap therapy and mandibular restraining 5. Kingsley and Farrar in the United States. Second. However. stating there is no effect on maxillary growth with others such as Sugawara stating the chin-cup therapy eliminates the restraining effect of the anterior crossbite on the maxillary growth62. This leads to a reduction in the prominence of the chin in the anteroposterior dimension. The redirection of mandibular growth leads to an increase in the lower facial height. The mandibular growth effects consist of a redirection of mandibular growth in the vertical dimension with little effect on the mandibular growth velocity. backward rotation of the mandible and remodeling of the mandible with closure of the gonial angle60. therefore lighter forces are used below the mandibular condyle. High forces are not tolerated by patients. Therefore. There is a heavily directed force aimed directly at the condylar area with the purpose of impeding mandibular growth and lighter forces aimed just below the condyle to produce a downward and backward rotation of the mandible. The effects on the craniofacial skeleton can be divided into effects on maxillary growth and effects on mandibular growth. the ideal patient for a chin-cup appliance would be a 38 .strong support for the use of the orthopedic-force chin-cup appliance in the clinical management in young patients with skeletal mandibular prognathism.3(b)ii Force magnitude and direction There are 2 main vectors and forces that have been utilised with chin-cup therapy. This causes lingual tipping of these teeth and unwanted crowding in the area. 5. The effects of maxillary growth are conflicting with authors such as Deguchi61. when an extraoral force is applied against the chin it produces a ligually directed force on the lower anterior dentition. The trade off in this case is the decrease in the prominence of the chin. The effect of chin-cup therapy is a redirection of the mandibular growth backwards and downwards. a short vertical facial height (hypodivergent facial type) and normally positioned or protrusive lower incisors.3(b)iii Treatment timing and duration Treatment timing of chin-cup therapy is variable. This is attributed to the catch up mandibular growth has been shown to occur with this treatment modality. 39 . However. 64 5.patient with a mild Class III occlusion. 5. The restraining and redirection of mandibular growth should occur until the mandible has ceased growth. He also found no statistical difference in the final skeletal profile between patients started at 7 years of age and those started at 11 years of age. The patients are instructed to wear the appliance for a period of 14-16 hours/day with a force level ranging from 300-500gm/side61. Arat66 in a long term (2-11 years) follow-up study on patients who underwent chin cup therapy demonstrated that chin cup therapy is neither a risk factor nor a prophylactic procedure in the development of TMD. Chin cup therapy has been frequently associated with the development of TMD symptoms and TMJ disorders65. The chin cup appliance can be divided into an occipital pull appliance for patients with mandibular protrusion or a vertical pull appliance for patients with an increase anterior facial height63.3(b)iv Long term effects on the TMJ The association between Orthodontics and temporomandibular disorders has been an intensely researched and very controversial issue in the orthodontic literature. Sugawara 62 advocates a treatment duration of more than 5 years as we now know that mandibular growth continues even after the pubertal growth spurt. Therefore even though Chin cup therapy appears to improve the skeletal prognathic charactersitics of Class III patients. 40 . these results are not stable in the long term due to the recovery growth exhibited by the mandible in the long term. This may indicate that the mandible attempted to recover the size that was originally determined morphogenetically up until the time that growth terminates62. and remodeling of mandibular morphology at the gonial angle and symphysis. Animal studies have also found that there is a decrease in the activity of the prechondrobalstic layer of the condylar cartilage that leads to a decreased bone formation at the condyle 67. The study by Sugawara62 on the long term effects of chin cup therapy indicate that the profile is greatly improved at the initial stages after treatment. backward repositioning of the mandible. namely stopping of chin cup wear. but that these changes were not maintained in the long term at growth completion with a reversion back to the original morphogenic pattern. retardation of mandibular growth at the condyle. Thus some recovery or rebound growth apparently took place at the condyles after chin cup use. The question is whether this decrease in bone formation at the condyle is maintained even after the force is removed and craniofacial growth has ceased. stimulated and accelerated condylar growth. It was suspected that the release of compressive forces from the condylar cartilage.3(b)v Stability of chin cup therapy The changes produced by chin cup therapy include a redirection of mandibular growth at the chin.5. 68 . the chin cup therapy seldom alters the inherent prognathic characteristic of Class III patients. if done before growth completion. In other words. intermaxillary. Dellinger72 then demonstrated in Macaca speciosa monkeys that the application of an orthopaedic force to the maxilla caused its separation from the pterygoid plates and the maxilla was repositioned anteriorly. nasomaxillary. pterygopalatine. He believed that the growth of the mandible was uncontrollable and that it was impossible to move the mandible backwards. The indication for the use of this treatment modality is in Class III patients with a retrusive maxilla which constitutes a large proportion of Class III patients of any ethnic group. 5. This concept was then utilized by Petite71 using heavier forces and in doing so reduced the treatment time of these patients. ethmomaxillary and the lacrimomaxillary sutures75. zygomaticomaxillary. In 1971 Delaire70 attempted to protract the maxilla using a facemask. 41 . The tension produced within the sutures is thought to cause an increase in vascularity in the region with a concomitant differentiation of the cellular tissues resulting in an increase in osteoblastic activity in the region73.5. The sutures that take part in this process involve the Frontomaxillary. Finally in 1987. zygomaticotemporal. Oppenheim69 reported that it was possible to bring the maxilla forward to compensate for mandibular overgrowth in the treatment of Class III malocclusions. 74.3(c)ii Biomechanics The application of protraction facemask therapy to the maxilla and the maxillary dentition produces significant tension in the circummaxillary sutures and the maxillary tuberosity regions.3(c) Protraction facemask therapy 5.3(c)i Indications and History In 1944. McNamara introduced the use of a bonded expansion appliance with acrylic coverage as the appliance for protraction of the maxilla. The amount of remodeling appears to be proportional to a suture’s distance from and orientation to the applied force system.Kambara76 in a study on eleven Macaca irus monkeys where a 300g intermittent protraction force per side was delivered demonstrated changes in the circummaxillary sutures and at the maxillary tuberosity. stretching of sutural connective tissue fibres. Jackson77 in a study on four Macaca nemestrina monkeys found that skeletal remodeling occurs in all circummaxillary sutures following the application of an anteriorly directed extraoral force to the maxilla. 42 . This was attributed to the posteroanterior traction and included the opening of sutures. The effects of protraction facemask therapy on the craniofacial complex varies depending on the line of action of the force used and the moments that are created at the sutures. Nanda78 in a study on eleven Macaca Mulatta mokeys demonstrated histological modifications in the zygomaticomaxillary suture after maxillary protraction and this varied according to the orientation of the force system applied. and apparent tissue homeostasis that maintains sutural width. The centre of resistance of the maxilla and the direction of the protraction force in relation to this plays a key role in the effects on the craniofacial skeleton. The centre of resistance of the maxillary complex has been defined by Miki79 and Hirato80 as being between the first and second premolars anterioposteriorly and between the lower margin of orbitale and distal apex of the first molar vertically in the sagittal plane. This has been shown by Bjork to be in a downward and forward direction at a 51 degree angle to SN. This has been demonstrated by Hata74 who showed the deformational effects of maxillary protraction on the human skull by means of strain gauges and displacement transducers.Lee81 identified the centre of resistance of the dentomaxillary complex as positioned on a line perpendicular to the functional occlusal plane located at the distal contacts of the maxillary first molars. By varying the force magnitude. and protraction forces 5mm above the palatal plane produced a combination of parallel forward movement and a very slight anterior rotation of the maxilla. It is further identified at half the distance from the functional occlusal place to the inferior border of the orbit. Force vectors that run through the centre of resistance of the maxillary complex will translate it in a desired forward and downward direction. 83 of the maxillary protraction. The force vectors produced by protraction headgear should mimic this translation. 43 . while those applied above the centre of resistance will tend to produce a clockwise rotation of the maxillary complex. direction and point of application82. Forces applied below the centre of resistance will tend to produce a counterclockwise moment on the maxillary complex. protraction forces 10mm above the Frankfort horizontal plane produced a posterior rotation of the maxilla with a forward movement of nasion. The desired protraction vector of the nasomaxillary complex would be to mimic that of natural growth. the amount of maxillary rotation and translation can be controlled. The study found that protraction forces at the level of the maxillary arch produced an anterior rotation and forward movement of the maxilla. 44 . but in contrast they were retroclined and extruded in group 2. in contrast to the clockwise rotation in group 2. The maxillary incisors were proclined slightly in group 1. in group 1. The dental effects of both methods were also different. In conclusion. such as counterclockwise rotation of the maxilla. The group 2 results suggest that this method can be used effectively on patients who present as class III combined with an anterior open bite. in group 1 they observed that the maxilla advanced forward with a counterclockwise rotation. The maxillary occlusal plane did not rotate in group 1. the force application from near the centre of resistance of the maxilla was an effective method to prevent the unwanted side effects.The most commonly used direction of force is at 30 degrees forward and downward to the occlusal plane applied at the canine region75 Keles84 tested these mechanics in a randomized clinical trial where the effects of varying protraction force direction was examined. however. A 500gm unilateral force was applied in both groups and the patients in both groups were instructed to wear the appliance for 16 hours per day in the first 3 months and then 12 hours a day for the next 3 months. A sample of 20 patients was selected and randomly assigned to 2 groups. The results showed that both force systems were equally effective to protract the maxilla. In group 2 they applied the force extraorally 20mm above the maxillary occlusal plane. In group 2 they observed an anterior translation of maxilla without rotation. In group 1 the force was applied intraorally from the canine region in a downward and forward direction at a 30 degree angle to the occlusal plane. Both the groups received a cap splint type palatal expander and the screw was activated twice a day for 10 days. Improved lip competence and posture 8. dental and soft tissue changes: 1.Proclination of maxillary incisors 4.5. 45 . The study found that treatment with protraction headgear can provide orthopedic effects on dentofacial morphologic features of growing skeletal Class III female patients.Extrusion and forward movement of maxillary molars 3. The soft tissue changes include an overall straightening of the profile with an improvement in lip position. lip competence and lip posture.Straightening of the profile Ngan89 attributed the forward movement of the maxilla with a corresponding increase (50 – 79%) in the soft tissues of the upper lip. The maxilla and maxillary dentition move forward and downward while the mandible and mandibular dentition moves backwards and downwards. Killicoglu90 measured the dentofacial changes in 14 subjects following the use of the Delaire facemask.Increase in lower facial height by downward and backward rotation of the mandible 5. dental and soft tissue changes. dental and soft tissue effects The generic effect of conventional facemask therapy includes skeletal.3(c)iii Skeletal.Retroclination of lower incisors 7.Restriction of mandibular growth 6. A summary of the effects can be broken down into the following85-89: Skeletal. He also attributed the movement of the mandible to a reduction (71 – 81%) in the soft tissues of the lower lip.Forward and downward movement of the maxilla 2. Mucedero92 also examined the effects of protraction facemask therapy on the sagittal pharyngeal dimensions.The treatment tended to reduce the concavity of the profile which was characterized by a forward movement of the upper lip. She reported that orthopaedic treatment of Class III malocclusions did not produce a significant increase in airway dimensions in the short term. backward repositioning of the pogonion soft. Sayinsu91 investigated the effects of protraction facemask therapy on the sagittal pharyngeal dimensions of 19 patients consecutively treated with protraction facemask therapy. The results of the study was that protraction facemask therapy demonstrated limited maxillary widening together with protraction of the maxilla with improvements of the nasopharyngeal but not the oropharyngeal dimensions in the short term. and slight inhibition of anterior migration of the lower lip. 46 . 5. 5. The effects of this treatment was found to be more marked in the upper lip area.3(c)iv Effects on the airway Protraction facemask therapy also has an effect on the airway dimensions.3(c)v Effects on the TMJ Ngan75 demonstrated that the reciprocal force from maxillary protraction was transmitted to the TMJ but this did not have an increase in muscle pain or activity therefore protraction headgear treatment does not have any untoward effect on the TMJ. Merwin96 examined 30 patients treated with maxillary expansion and protraction headgear. However. 47 . His study suggested that a similar skeletal response can be obtained when maxillary protraction was started either before age 8 (5 to 8 years) or after the age 8 years (8 to 12 years). He divided the sample into patients older than 8 years old and those younger than 8 years old and found strikingly similar therapeutic response between the younger and older age groups. They found that maxillary protraction had a growthstimulating effect on the maxilla during the treatment period. The groups consisted of those less than 10 years old. Baik87 examined the effects of protraction headgear in 3 groups of children. Using a Kruskwall-Wallis test he found no statistical difference between the 3 groups. cephalometric changes in 129 subjects with conditions diagnosed as skeletal Class III malocclusion and who had been treated with maxillary protraction. However he stated that due to the small sample size per group he could not evaluate the accurate effects of the treatment according to age. when changes due to treatment according to ages were compared. Numerous authors state that there is a small window of opportunity in the treatment of Class III patients to achieve the desired outcome31. 94. 93.3(c)vi Timing of treatment Treatment timing to produce the optimal results has been the subject of intense research over the last few years. there was no statistical difference. Sung and Baik95 evaluated the effect of maxillary protraction on facial growth. those between 10 and 12 years old and a final group of children older than 12 years.5. Skeletal age rather than chronological age has gained popularity as a measure of treatment timing in recent years. a chin cup or both. Young patients show greater and faster results in less time.Contrary to these findings is the work of other authors such as Baccetti31 who found that his younger patient group exhibited a significantly greater advancement of the maxillary structures and more upwards and forward direction of condylar growth when compared to the older group. It has also been recommended that the timing of force application is during the evening after dinner to match the circadian rhythm of growth hormone production85. Suda97 treated 30 Japanese patients with protraction facemask therapy and another 30 patients with a lingual arch. may produce more favourable results.3(c)vii Duration of treatment and force magnitude Correction of the anterior crossbite and the Class III molar relationship has been shown to range from 6 to 12 months75 depending on the severity of the malocclusion. The results indicate the correction can be achieved in all age groups. Although the treatment effects of both groups are different the results suggested that earlier treatment. but that the treatment should be started as soon as the diagnosis is made and cooperation allows for it. 6 to 9 and 9 to 12 years old. 48 . Evaluation of skeletal age has been traditionally undertaken using hand-wrist radiographs but cervical maturational indicators have gained popularity in recent years34. 93. compliance is improved. These were 3 to 6. as determined by bone age. The force magnitude that is recommended is approximately 12-14 oz per side for approximately 14-16 hours per day93. Aesthetics is greatly enhanced. These patients were treated with protraction headgear and expansion. and the possible psychosocial scars can be greatly reduced. Saadia98 studied 112 patients divided in 3 age groups. 5. After maxillary protraction. The results obtained were as follows: 1. 2. Group I was divided into three subgroups by age and two subgroups by the timing of the protraction. 49 .The maxilla moved more forward in the expansion group. bite opening. The cephalometric radiographs of all subjects were analyzed before and after correction of anterior crossbite. The use of palatal expansion has been advocated one week before the initiation of the protraction therapy even in the absence of arch length requirements or maxillary constriction. and the mandible and mandibular dentitions moved backward and downward. Haas99 has shown that maxillary expansion is almost always associated with a forward and downward movement of the maxilla. The advantages of palatal expansion include an improvement in the transverse dimension of the maxilla with concomitant correction of a posterior crossbite.5. Group I consisted of 47 subjects with rapid palatal expansion appliances and group II consisted of 13 subjects with labiolingual appliances. increasing the arch length. the maxilla and maxillary dentitions moved forward and downward. This is in agreement with numerous authors100-102. They were divided into two groups according to the intraoral appliances used.3(c)viii Protraction with or without RME The incorporation of palatal expansion in the protraction headgear protocol is a contentious issue. loosening of the circummaxillary sutures and a downward and forward movement of the entire nasomaxillary complex. compared with the labiolingual appliance group. Baik87 in an investigation to study the benefits of expansion on protraction headgear examined sixty subjects with ages ranging from 8 to 13 years. Group 3 consisted of an observation group for 12 months.Age did not show any statistically significant difference. 5.9mm of the non expansion group) In conflict with Baik’s study is Vaughn103 who conducted a randomized clinical trial to quantify the effects of maxillary protraction with or without maxillary advancement. Cephalometric analysis with traditional cephalometric measurements. There are few published studies addressing the issue that portray conflicting results. The results of the continuing 5-year clinical trial indicate that early facemask therapy.0mm in the expansion group compared with 0. Group 2 consisted of facemask without palatal expansion. with or without palatal expansion. an x-y coordinate system. 4.The palatal plane angle decreased more in the protraction with palatal expansion group than protraction after palatal expansion group. Baik found greater maxillary protraction with palatal expansion (2.3. and an occlusal plane analysis were used in the study. 50 .3(c)ix Stability of protraction facemask therapy The stability of protraction facemask therapy is another contentious issue. is effective to correct skeletal Class III malocclusions. Forty-six children aged 5 to 10 years were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 groups: Group 1 consisted of facemask with palatal expansion. expansion does not significantly aid in the correction of the Class III malocclusion. Therefore in the absence of any other reason to expand such as an arch length discrepancy or maxillary transverse deficiency. Other studies are in direct conflict with this suggesting that patients treated with protraction facemask therapy resume their inherent Class III pattern after treatment is completed. The changes in the maxilla. Treatment results showed more convexity of the facial profile from anterior displacement and downward and backward rotation of the maxilla 51 .Wisth104 compared the post treatment growth of 22 children treated with quad-helix and facemask therapy to 40 children that acted as Class I controls. During the 12 months post treatment period no statistical differences were found in the horizontal and vertical movement of A point. after treatment and 1 year after the completion of treatment. The sample consisted of 16 treated individuals and compared to 13 untreated matched controls. Lateral cephalograms were taken before treatment. These results indicate that the expansion and facemask therapy led to the normalization of growth following treatment. mandible and overbite were not statistically significant between both groups during the post treatment period. Shanker105 studied the post treatment changes following hyrax expansion and protraction facemask therapy of 25 Chinese children and compared them to untreated Class III patients matched for age sex and race. The records of 24 Class III patients treated with a banded expansion appliance and custom facemask were compared with 24 Class I and 27 Class III untreated controls. Chong32 evaluated treatment effects and post treatment changes following protraction facemask therapy. Cephalometric means were calculated for the annualized data and compared univariately with unpaired t tests to determine significant differences. No differences were found between the treated patients and the Class III controls during the post treatment observation period although some reduction in the overjet was noted in the treated group. McDonald33 analyzed the cephalometric changes that occurred during and after the correction of Class III malocclusion. The treatment was found to be stable 2 years after removal of the appliances. These changes were attributed to a forward movement of the maxilla. and retroclination of the mandibular incisors. Dental changes compensated for decreasing overjet whereas the soft tissue profile showed no significant posttreatment changes. 33 children in the late 52 . whereas mandibular growth was similar to the controls. A positive overjet was obtained in all cases after 6 to 9 months of treatment. The observation period for this study was 17 months where maxillary growth in the treated Class III patients was observed to be less than the Class I controls. 15 of the 20 patients maintained a positive overjet or an end-to-end incisal relationship. Mandibular growth was similar for the treatment and control groups. Patients who reverted back to a negative overjet were found to have excess horizontal mandibular growth that was not compensated by proclination of the maxillary incisors. The maxillary teeth moved forward while the lower incisors retruded. Ngan75 investigated twenty patients with skeletal Class III malocclusion treated consecutively with maxillary expansion and a protraction facemask. The molar relationship was overcorrected to Class I or Class II dental arch relationship. proclination of the maxillary incisors.and clockwise rotation of the mandible. Finally Franchi107 performed a postpubetal assessment of treatment timing of maxillary expansion and facemask protraction. The overbite was reduced with a significant increase in lower facial height. At the end of the 4-year observation period. backward and downward rotation of the mandible. Post protraction results showed the maxilla did not relapse after treatment but grew anteriorly similar to the Class III controls but less than the Class I controls. The results of the study led to the authors advocating the overcorrection of the Class III malocclusion to compensate for post protraction growth deficiency of the maxilla. In agreement with this study Gallagher 106 reported similar post treatment changes in a sample of 22 patients treated with expansion and protraction facemask therapy. Ngan44 advocates the use of the Growth Treatment Response Vector (GTVR) to predict excessive mandibular growth in the Class III subject. The treatment effects were shown to be maintained after the protraction facemask therapy and comprehensive fixed orthodontic treatment. 5. The aforementioned studies therefore demonstrate that protraction facemask therapy does not lead to normalisation of growth but rather the patients resume their characteristic Class III growth pattern of deficient maxillary growth with normal to excessive mandibular growth.primary or early mixed dentition were compared to 17 children treated in the late mixed dentition. Radiographs of 24 untreated Class III patients were used as controls. This involves the use of serial cephalometric radiographs of the patient take a few years apart after protraction facemask therapy.3(c)x Prognosis of early Class III therapy Numerous investigations throughout the years have attempted to predict the progression of the Class III malocclusion. The diagnostic procedure is performed early during the mixed dentition period once a diagnosis has been made. These studies therefore support the concept of overcorrection of the malocclusion to compensate for future Class III growth. The interesting finding was that later treatment resulted in a greater inhibition of mandibular growth. The GTVR analysis compares 53 . The patient is then treated and followed up over the subsequent 3 to 4 years to observe their growth with no active treatment being carried out at this stage. During the early permanent dentition a GTVR analysis is then performed to ascertain whether the patient can be treated successfully with camouflage treatment or whether treatment should be delayed until growth has ceased and surgical intervention is indicated. This tracing is then transferred to the follow up tracing superimposed onto it using the midsgittal stable cranial structures109. This implies that the mandibular growth exceeds maxillary growth by 23% to maintain normal skeletal relationships. The perpendicular lines from point A and B are then drawn to the constructed occlusal plane. He showed that there is a significant difference in the GTVR of both groups. The study indicated the patients with a GTRV 54 . Points A and B are located on the follow up radiograph and the perpendicular from these lines is drawn to the occlusal plane of the initial post treatment radiograph.horizontal growth changes in the maxilla and the mandible between the post treatment cephalogram and the follow up cephalogram. Ngan110 also conducted a study on 20 patients successfully treated with protraction headgear and 20 patients unsuccessfully treated with protraction headgear. This step is similar to the “Wits” analysis108. The occlusal plane line is then traced on this cephalogram and is defined by the line connecting the mesiobuccal cusp of the upper first maxillary molar to the point of the incisal tip of the maxillary incisor.77. This is done by locating point A and point B on the post treatment cephalogram. The GTRV ratio was calculated by using the following formula: GTRV :! Horizontal growth changes of the maxilla Horizontal growth changes of the mandible The GTVR of an individual with a normal growth pattern as derived from the Bolton growth study between the ages of 8 to 16 is 0. The distance between the A point of the two tracings along the occlusal plane represented the growth changes of the maxilla and the distance on the occlusal plane of the B point of the two tracings represented the growth changes of the mandible. small ramal length.3(d) Skeletal anchorage and maxillary protraction It has been discussed that protraction facemask therapy has been used successfully in the treatment of Class III malocclusions. and obtuse gonial angle are highly associated with unsatisfactory treatment outcomes after pubertal growth.557 + 0. Certain cephalometric variables have also been established to predict the future Class III growth pattern. 5. large mandibular length.206 (Ar-Goi-Me) P= The probablility that early orthopaedic treatment will be successful in a patient with a Clas III malocclusion The results suggest that Class III growing patients with forward position of the mandible. The treatment changes from this include both 55 .162(Co-Goi) – 0. The objective of this treatment modality has been the forward displacement of the maxilla by the application of an external force from the facemask through to the facial sutures via the dentition.129(Co-Pg) + 0. This equation is as follows: P = 1 1 + Exp(-L) The value of L = 30.33 and 0.that falls between 0.196(Co-GD) – 0.38 then the patient should be warned of the future need for orthognathic surgery.5% of the time and unsuccessful ones 70% of the time. This is based on the results of early orthopaedic treatment with protraction facemask therapy using a single cephalogram. However if the GTRV lies below 0.88 can be successfully treated with camouflage treatment. A logistic equation was established that is accurate in predicting successfully treated Class III patients 95. downward and backward rotation of the mandible and retroclination of the mandibular incisors. the proclination of the maxillary incisors. These treatment side effects are disadvantageous in patients with arch length deficiencies and open bite tendencies. Titanium implants were placed surgically into the maxillary. The ankylosed teeth were then used as abutments to deliver an anteriorly directed intermittent extraoral force. and occipital bones of four pigtail monkeys. Kokich111 describes a technique to intentionally ankylose deciduous teeth in a patient with severe maxillary retrusion. The reason for the dental changes is the use of tooth bourne devices to transmit the force via the elastics and headgear to the facial sutures.skeletal and dental components namely the forward movement of the maxilla. Extraoral traction 56 . the anterior crossbite was nearly corrected. the implants were exposed and abutments were placed. After a 4-month healing period. The first animal study that used titanium implants as rigid anchorage for maxillofacial protraction was conducted by Smalley113. frontal. At that point the ankylosed teeth loosened because of root resorption and the treatment was terminated. zygomatic. After 12 months of treatment. Cephalometric superimposition demonstrated that the occlusal correction was the result of anterior maxillary movement with little mandibular growth and no movement of the ankylosed teeth. These dental changes are usually undesirable and include the forward movement of the maxillary molars and incisors and the extrusion of the maxillary molars. To eliminate these problems the use of ankylosed deciduous canines has been advocated to supply anchorage for maxillary orthopaedics111. The results suggested that intentionally ankylosed teeth may be used as abutments for extraoral traction in patients with Class III malocclusions. The disadvantage of this procedure is that the treatment period may need to be shortened because of early resorption of the anchor teeth112. After 6 months of osseointeration a 400g force was applied to the implants for 14 hours per day for 8 months via a protraction facemask appliance.appliances were then attached to the abutments. Singer114 placed osseointegrated implants into the zygomatic process of a 12 year old female cleft palate patient with maxillary retrusion associated with their Class III malocclusion. maxillary retrusion and severe oligodontia. Cranial implants were used to support the framework of the traction appliance. The results were stable 1 year 57 . Enacar115 also utilized osseintegrated implants in a 10 year old patient with a Class III skeletal relationship. This resulted in a significant anterior displacement of the nasomaxillary complex. In some monekys. a counter clockwise rotation of the mandible and an improved facial profile. A titanium lag screw was placed into the maxillary alveolus and after 3 weeks an 800g orthodontic force was applied. Cephalometric and dry skull analyses showed that the amount of skeletal protraction was significant. This produced a 4mm downward and forward displacement of the maxilla. The facial implants remained immobile throughout the experiment. the force was applied to the zygomatic bones. those in the facial bones were used to attach springs that delivered a protraction force. The findings also demonstrated that it was possible to control the direction of maxillary protraction. In others. This was also accompanied by a 2 degree increase in the SNmandibular plane angle. The results were stable 1 year post cessation of the treatment. A tensile force of 600gm per side was maintained until approximately 8 mm of maxillary anterior displacement had occurred. Clinically an increase in convexity of the profile was observed along with a fullness of the infraorbital region. The application of force varied among animals. the force was applied to the maxilla. after treatment had ceased. The hexagonal implant of 7.7mm diameter was placed in the palatal bone of the maxilla of an 11 year old Chinese female with a Class III malocclusion characterized by a midface deficiency. There was no forward movement and minimum extrusion of the maxillary molars. a backwards and downwards rotation of the mandible and an associated increase in the mandibular plane angle and lower facial height. Due to these limitatons. The advantage of using the position of the implants in the aforementioned studies is that they are placed in sites away for the dentition where there are no adjacent tooth structures or developing tooth structures. Although the use of osseointegrated implants resulted in reducing or eliminating the undesired dental effect of maxillary protraction headgear an increase in the anterior vertical dimension with a downward and backward rotation of the mandible was still observed. A 400g force was applied to the onplant from a facemask at 30 degrees to the occlusal plane for 12 hours a day for a period of 12 months. Another disadvantage of the use of the protraction headgear is that it is only utilized for approximately 13 – 16 hours per day at best and that there is a social constraint or stigma associated with them.9 mm. De Clerke5 used titanium miniplates for anchorage to apply pure bone-borne orthopaedic forces between the maxilla and the mandible for 24 hours per day on three girls aged 10 to 11 years with severe skeletal Class III malocclusions with maxillary deficiency and a concave soft tissue profile. To overcome these limitations Hong116 utilised the use of onplants as absolute orthopaedic anchorage for maxillary protraction. There was a forward and downward displacement of the maxilla by 2. He used 4 Bollard miniplates inserted into the infrazygomatic crests 58 . The main disadvantage however is the extent of surgical intervention required and the development of soft tissue irritation associated with the location of the implant fixtures. primarily through maxillary advancement with little effect on the dentoalveolar units or change in mandibular position. They conculuded that the use of intermaxillary forces applied to temporary anchorage devices appears to be a promising treatment method for Class III malocclusions. These were inserted under general anaesthesia. All 6 patients showed improvements in the skeletal relationship. Wits and facial convexity values in all three of the cases. Heymann117 then repeated the study with De Clerke on 6 consecutively treated patient with the same treatment protocol. Cephalometric evaluation between the beginning of treatment and the end of treatment showed a marked increase of ANB. The concept behind the lighter forces used as opposed to the heavier facemask forces traditionally used is that there may be a more favorable maxillary growth response under moderate continuous traction rather than under heavy forces interrupted during the day. The results indicate that the effect of the intermaxillary elastic forces was throughout the nasomaxillary structures. 59 . Cone-beam computed tomography scans were taken before and after treatment and were used to create 3-dimensional volumetric models that were superimposed on non growing structures in the anterior cranial base to determine anatomic changes during treatment. The follow up period ranged from 11 to 38 months where the Class III correction was maintained. There were no major changes in upper incisor inclination whereas the lower incisors proclined. There was a slight counterclockwise rotation in all three of the cases. This was then increased to 200gm per side. No rotation of the mandible was observed in 2 out of 3 of the cases whereas a slight clockwise rotation was seen in one of the cases.of the maxilla and between the canine and the first premolar or between the canine and the lateral incisor on both the right and left sides. Initially a force of 100gm per side was applied. A recent case study by Wilmes118 used the Benefit miniscrew system where 2 palatal miniscrews were inserted into the palate and a bone anchored expander (Hybrid hyrax expander) was constructed and used as anchorage to protract the maxilla via intermaxillary elastics connected to a Mentoplate surgical place in the lower arch. Separation of craniofacial sutures with both high and low expansion forces resembles the sutural activity during normal growth. increase in the number of osteoblasts and the deposition of osteoid on both sutural bone surfaces.There has been a surge in recent research incorporating both the use of palatal skeletal anchorage in the form of non osseointegrated miniscrews in association with skeletal plates placed under local anaesthetic in the treatment of Class III malocclusions. The combined use maxillary expansion and maxillary traction can be also described as sutural expansion of the intermaxillary suture combined with sutural protraction osteogenesis of the 60 . Both of these treatment modalities involve separation of all the circummaxillary sutures with concomitant osteogenic activity histologically.RAMEC) for maxillary protraction Sutural expansion or protraction osteogenesis grows new bone by mechanically stretching the craniofacial sutures. Maxillary protraction is also an example of sutural protraction osteogenesis. This has been mostly in the form of case reports and are promising to be successful in the treatment of the Class III malocclusion. The biological response to this mechanical traction includes widening of the sutures. 5. Rapid maxillary expansion is an example of sutural expansion osteogenesis. In two consecutively treated cases the Class III malocclusion was treated successfully. The craniofacial sutures are osteogenic tissues between opposing membranous bones. changes in the fibre bundle orientation.3(e) Alternate rapid maxillary expansion and constriction (Alt. retroclination of the mandibular incisors. 61 . the purpose of the expansion in the absence of arch length discrepancies or tranverse deficiencies should be to disarticulate rather than over expand the maxilla. This may be due to the tooth borne nature of the devices utilized or that the maxilla is not disarticulated well enough for protraction. Some authors119 indicate that 5mm of palatal expansion is sufficient while others120 state that 12 – 15mm is required. In his case study the amount of protraction achieved was 5. upward canting of the occlusal plane. Therfore Liou4 developed the Alt-RAMEC approach to effectively disarticulate the maxilla allowing for greater orthopaedic traction in less time. The main premise of this treatment is that the maxillary expansion “disarticulates” the circummaxillary sutures so that the facemask traction becomes more productive. However the amount of skeletal protraction is limited. This cycle was repeated for 9 weeks and then the maxilla was protracted using fixed intra oral springs. There is not general consensus in the literature with regards to the amount of expansion necessary to “disarticulate” the maxilla. The effects were both skeletal and dental in nature and involved an upward tilting of the palatal plane.circummaxillary sutures. a downward and backward rotation of the mandible. His expansion protocol involved using a hinged expander to expand the maxilla 1mm per day for a period of seven days. It seems that the more expansion that is produced will result in a greater amount of tension or stress in the circummaxillary sutures. mesial tipping of the maxillary molars and lingual tipping of the mandibular molars. The maxilla was then constricted by 1mm per day for a period of another 7 days.8mm horizontally at A point with the majority of the advancement occurring in the first 3 months (2 months of Alt-RAMEC followed by 1 month of protraction). The protraction results were reported to be stable without significant relapse in the 2 years post treatment. However. proclination of the maxillary incisors. Their results indicated that Alt-RAMEC alone does not increase the amount of forward movement of the maxilla and that other factors such as patient age. whereas backward movement of the mandible and anterior facial height changes showed no difference between both groups. Histological analysis of the circummaxillary sutures indicated that Alt-RAMEC opens both the sagittally and coronally running circumaxillary sutures quantitatively more than conventional RME. 62 .Wang121 in a study to analyse quantitatively the amount of circummaxillary opening in the AltRAMEC protocol harvested the craniofacial skeletons of 12 inbred cats. the duration of facemask worn. Isci122 investigated the dentoskeletal effects of 1 week of rapid palatal expansion compared to the activation-deactivation protocol where both groups underwent protraction facemask treatment. It was reported however that the Alt-RAMEC group was less compliant than the rapid maxillary expansion group. They were divided into 2 groups. One group underwent maxillary expansion for 1 week while the other underwent the Alt-RAMEC protocol for 5 weeks. The pilot study consisted of eighteen consecutively treated patients with either the Alt-RAMEC protocol or rapid maxillary expansion alone. more than 5 weeks of Alt-RAMEC would be needed to increase the opening of the coronally running circumaxillary sutures. and the treatment duration need to be considered. Do-de Latour123 evaluated the difference in the extent of maxillary protraction when combined with either 7 weeks of Alt-RAMEC or 1 week of rapid maxillary expansion. In contrast. However. The results of the study indicated that the anterior movement of point A for the activation deactivation group was approximately twice that of the rapid expansion group. Both groups wore protraction headgear after their different expansion protocols for approximately 12 months. This they concluded that the anterior movement of point A demonstrated that the activation deactivation protocol positively affect maxillary protraction. The recent advances in the use of temporary anchorage devices for the delivery of orthopaedic and orthodontic forces to the craniofacial complex in conjunction with the assumed benefit of disarticulation of the maxilla using the Alt-RAMEC protocol have culminated in the genesis of this study which involves the use of Temporary Anchorage Devices (TADs) in the treatment of Class III malocclusion using the Alt-RAMEC protocol in conjunction with Class III elastics to produce a more pronounced skeletal effect to maxillary protraction in a reduced amount of time. 63 . The results indicate that the anterior movement of point A in the activation deactivation group was approximately twice that for the expansion only group. The backward movement of the mandible showed no significance between both groups and neither did the anterior facial height increase.Ischi122 evaluated the dentofacial effects of 1 week rapid palatal expansion versus activation deactivation protocols with protraction headgear. The rapid palatal expansion group were instructed to expand the for 1 week while the activation deactivation group were instructed to expand and contract weekly for 4 weeks. 6(2):154-71. Murata S. 16. American Journal of Orthodontics 1974. Liou EJ-W. Sassouni V. The prevalence and characteristics of malocclusion among senior high school students in upstate New York. Class III malocclusions in the deciduous dentition: a morphological and correlation study.67:2123-29. 9. Mandibular prognathism.66(2):140-71. The problem of "timing" in facial growth. 2.37(4):253-76. The aeitiological factors in Class III malocclusion. Ellis EE. McNamara JJA.42(5):295-305. American Journal of Orthodontics 1965. A classification of skeletal facial types. 4. 11. Glossary of Dental Terms. National centre for health statistics 1973(74-1612). Tollaro I. 8. Kelly. H DC. European Journal of Orthodontics 1993. Behrents RG. Differences Between the Facial Skeletal Patterns Of Class III Malocclusion and Normal Occlusion*. British Journal of Orthodontics 1989. Evans WG. Preston CB. Components of adult class III malocclusion. British Journal of Orthodontics 1993. 15. An estimation of craniofacial growth in the untreated Class III female with anterior crossbite. Class III malocclusion: A cephalometric study of Saudi Arabians.112(4):425-34. Ellis Iii E. Baccetti T. Morphological vartiability of skeletal class III relationships as revealed by cephalometric analysis. Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery 1984. European Journal of Orthodontics 1994. 13. Guyer EC. McNamara JA. 7. 64 . Sadowsky PL. 18. Skeletal effects of early treatment of Class III malocclusion with maxillary expansion and face-mask therapy. Tollaro I. The Angle Orthodontist 1955. Trans Europ Orthod Soc 1970:131-43. 12. 14. A T. References 1. McGill JS. BSI LONDON 1983. Franchi L.56(1):7-30.25(4):208-22. Institute BS. The Angle Orthodontist 1986. 6.113(3):333-43.16(5):401-8. Cons NC. E A.6. Journal od Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery 2009. American Journal of Orthodontics 1969. 3. Carlos JP. Effective maxillary orthopaedic protraction for growing Class III patients: a clinical application simulated distraction osteogenesis.20(1):10-23. Components of Class III Malocclusion in Juveniles and Adolescents. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 1998.41:248. Sanborn RT. with special reference to the period of the changing dentition. An assessment of occlusion of the teeth of children . Miyajima K. Sana M. Classification of malocclusion. 10.55(2):109-23. 19. Orthopaedic traction of the maxiila with miniplates: A new perspective for treatment of midface deficiency.15(5):347-70. 5. Horizontal skeletal typing in an ethnic Chinese population with true Class III maloclusion.51(6):437-45. 17. Progress In Orthodontics 2005.16(3):201-06. Ast DB. Jacobson A. McNamara Jr JA. K L. McNamara JJA. Deitrich U. Battagel. Dental Cosmos 1899. American Journal of Orthodontics 1951. Krogman WM. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 1997. A genetic study of Class III malocclusion. Nanda SK. Prepubertal growth of mandibular prognathism. The Angle Orthodontist 2004.75(4):510-20. Johnston LE. Seminars in Orthodontics 2005. Eckert GJ. A simplified approach to prediction. 32. McNamara Jr JA. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 2000.62(2):139-44.58:565-77. Fangh√§nel J. Franchi L. King LB. Jr JAM. Proff P. S L. Currier GF.20. Chong Y-H. 22. Baccetti T. 34. Treatment and posttreatment craniofacial changes after rapid maxillary expansion and facemask therapy. McNamara JA. The Angle Orthodontist 2006. Will F. Kawamoto T. 26. Martinez F. 38. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 1993.118(4):404-13. 65 . 25. 29. Gedrange T. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 1970. Turley PK. Measurements of Mandibular Length: A Comparison of Articulare vs Condylion. Lozanoff S. Sugawara J. Craniofacial pattern of Class III deciduous dentition. Mc Namara JA. √Örtun J. Cephalometric changes after the correction of Class III malocclusion with maxillary expansion/facemask therapy. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 1999. 28. Leite LP. Baccetti T. An Estimate of Craniofacial Growth in Class III Malocclusion. Baccetti T. Chang H-P. 36.116(1):13-24. Diers NR. Kapust AJ. McNamara JA. Aki T. Morphometry of the cranial base in subjects with class III malocclusion. Andria LM. Kinoshita Z. American Journal of Orthodontics 1975. Mitani H. McNamara JJA.67(3):253-57. Haas DW. Gender Differences in Class III Malocclusion. Correlation of the Cranial Base Angle and Its Components with Other Dental/Skeletal Variables and Treatment Time.8(1):21-28. 21. Cranial Base Features in Skeletal Class III Patients. Baccetti T. Sato K. Mitani H. 33.106(1):60-69. Seminars in Orthodontics 2007.76(4):577-84. 24. 27. Franchi L. Growth in the Untreated Class III Subject. Prevatte TM. Nanda RS. Growth of mandibular prognathism after pubertal growth peak. Ive JC.13(3):186-99. The Angle Orthodontist 1996.80(5):546-53.11(3):119-29. Changes following the use of protraction headgear for early correction of Class III malocclusion.78(3):433-39. The Angle Orthodontist 2005. Franchi L.74(3):361-66. 37. Bokan I. Mitani H. Transverse maxillary deficiency in Class II and Class III malocclusions: a cephalometric and morphometric study on postero-anterior films. The Angle Orthodontist 2001. Seminars in Orthodontics 2007. American Journal of Orthodontics 1981. Baccetti T. 35. Recovery Growth of the Mandible After Chin Cup Therapy: Fact or Fiction.13(3):130-42. 31. Journal of Dental Research 1997. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 1994. The Cervical Vertebral Maturation (CVM) Method for the Assessment of Optimal Treatment Timing in Dentofacial Orthopedics.104(4):33036. Reyes BC. Franchi L. The Angle Orthodontist 1992.76(2):694.66(5):351-62. Orthodontics & Craniofacial Research 2005. 30. The Angle Orthodontist 2008.71(3):210-15. Baccetti T. Macdonald KE. Singh GD. Reyes BC. Assessment of symphysis morphology as a predictorof the direction of mandibular growth. 23. Seminars in Orthodontics 2005. The morphology of the potential Class III skeletal pattern in the growing child. American Journal of Orthodontics 1986.3(4):255-64.76(4):410-22.117(1):1-9. Wei S. Schulhof RJ.22(5):314-25. Rabie ABM. 41. Viazis AD. Tse A. 57.102(2):160-62. American Journal of Orthodontics 1977. Papadopoulos.98(4):313-22. A Special Method of Predicting Mandibular Growth Potential for Class III Malocclusion. Stricker G. McNamara JA.53(3):175-91. 1983. Seminars Orthod 1997. Clifford E. Flanary CM. Franchi L. Giddon DB. Chen F. Cephalometric variables to predict future success of early orthopedic Class III treatment. H√§gg U. American Journal of Orthodontics 1979. 51. Nakamura S.104(2):199-200.89(4):302-11.105(6):561-67. 56. ‹lgen M. Yiu C. A Follow-up Study of Early Treatment of Pseudo Class III Malocclusion. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 1997.74(4):465-72.53:175-91. The Dilemma of Class III Treatment. Evans CA. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 2000. 48. The National Institute of Dental Research.71(4):421-30.11(3):140-45. Andersen Aarhus CE. The Angle Orthodontist 2004. 40. VanSickels JE. 49. 1981] Data taken from Campbell PM. 47. Diagnostic criteria for pseudo-Class III malocclusion. 43. Impact of orthognathic surgery on normal and abnormal personality dimensions: A 2-year followup study of 61 patients. The Angle Orthodontist 1983. 50. Joondeph DR. Turley P. 52. Huge SA. 42. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 2005. Prediction of abnormal growth in Class III malocclusions. Angle Orthod. Gunel E. Anterior crossbite correction in the early deciduous dentition. Cohen LK. Hanada K. 55.39. Early Class III treatment [Unpublished thesis presented at 81st session of the American Association of Orthodontists. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 1994.88(5):409-24. DL T. Psychosocial aspects of craniofacial disfigurement : A "State of the Art" assessment conducted by the Craniofacial Anomalies Program Branch. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 1992. Williams S. Ngan P. Ngan P. Littlefield JH. Vadiakas G. Gu Y. 44. M K. P C. Early Timely Treatment of Class III Malocclusion. 46. San Francisco. journal of Clinical Orthodontics 1988. Predictive variables for the outcome of early functional treatment of Class III malocclusion. American Journal of Orthodontics 1985. Baccetti T. Ngan P. Rabie ABM. Tollaro I. Bendeus M. Treatment response and long-term dentofacial adaptations to maxillary expansion and protraction. Journal of Orofacial Orthopaedics 2005.75(2):191-95. 66 .112(1):80-86.66(2):135-47. The functional regulator (FR-3) of Fr‰nkel. Firatli S.127(3):301-06. Hagg U. The Angle Orthodontist 2005. 53. Orthopaedic correction of Class III malocclusion with palatal expansion abd custom protraction headgear. Terada K. The effects of the Fr‰nkel's function regulator on the Class III malocclusion. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 1993. 45. Barnwell GM. Rugh AL. Dental arch and cephalometric changes following treatment for Class III malocclusion by means of a functional regulator (FR-3) appliance. Williamson WV. Early orthodontic treatment. Meskin LH. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 1990. The dilemma of Class III treatment. 54. Ghiz MA. 1981. anatomic. Deguchi T. 64. H P. Long-term effects of chincap therapy on skeletal profile in mandibular prognathism. Baik HS.110(5):502-07. Biomechanical and clinical changes of the craniofacial complex from orthopedic maxillary protraction. Matsumoto M. American Journal of Orthodontics 1965. 61. Oh TK. Long-term application of chincup force alters the morphology of the dolichofacial Class III mandible. Mitani H. Graber TM.Versus Nondolichofacial Patients. Yiu C.30:345-68. Sakamoto T. Lee KJ. American Journal of Orthodontics 1973. 73. Hata S.98(2):127-33. Trans Europ Orthod Soc 1971.3(4):255-64. 67 .91(4):305-11. Endo N. Sakuda M. 71.114(3):277-82. et al. Ichikawa K. The effects of extraoral low-pull traction to the mandibular dentition of Macaca mulatta. Z A. Adapttions following accelerated facemask therapy. Graber LW. Iida Y. A O. 74. Wei SHY. Mitani H. and histologic changes in Macaca mulatta after application of a continuous-acting retraction force on the mandible. Asano T. 62. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 2004. 63. Hunt NP. American Journal of Orthodontics 1944. Biomechanical effects of maxillary protraction on the craniofacial complex. Long term affect of Chin-cap therapy on the temporomandibular joints. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 1999. American Journal of Orthodontics 1973. 70. Dellinger EL. Nakagawa M. Kuroda T. 75. 65.61(2):145-52. 66. Bluher JA. Kageyama T.116(6):610-15. The University of Michigan 1983:253-89. Ngan PW. Stress distribution in the temporomandibular joint produced by orthopedic chincup forces applied in varying directions: A threedimensional analytic approach with the finite element method.125(3):294-301. 68. Tanne K. Kamogashira K. Treatment response and long-term dentofacial adaptations to maxillary expansion and protraction. 60.51(11):823-55. A possibility of physiologic orthodontic movement. Chin Cap Force to a Growing Mandible. J D.72(1):23-41.64(6):555-77.81:102. Chin Cup Treatment Outcomes in Skeletal Class III Dolicho. Force distribution of the temporomandibular joint and temporal bone surface subjected to the head-chincup force. Tanne K. Treatment effects of Fr‰nkel functional regulator III in children with class III malocclusions. Craniofacial growth series. The cephalometric. Tanaka E.54(2):93-122. 69. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 1996. The Angle Orthodontist 1991. 72. The Angle Orthodontist 2005. Chin cup therapy for mandibular prognathism. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 1990. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF ORTHODONTICS 2003. Jee SH.75(4):576-83. American Journal of Orthodontics 1977. Deguchi T.25(5):471-5. Joho J-P. The Angle Orthodontist 1984. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 1998.58. 67. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 1987. Hagg U. Janzen EK. Itoh T. A preliminary study of anterior maxillary displacement. 59. Sugawara J. Deguchi T. Sakuda M.63(5):509-16. La Croissance maxillarire: deductions therapeutiques. Seminars in Orthodontics 1997. An experimental study on the centre of resistance of the nasomaxillary complexTwo dimensional analysis on the coronal plane of the dry skull. BeGole EA. M M. 68 . The Angle Orthodontist 1984. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 1990. Nanda R. Shapiro PA.75(3):318-33. 93. Hickory W.115(6):675-85. The effectiveness of protraction face mask therapy: A meta-analysis. 81. Cozza P. Effects of maxillary protraction with or without expansion on the sagittal pharyngeal dimensions in Class III subjects.78(2):213-26. European Journal of Orthodontics 2006. 79. Ngan P.84:1225-62. Kambara T. Yiu C. 86. Biomechanical and clinical considerations of a modified protraction headgear. Protraction of the maxillofacial complex. Mermigos J. Wei SHY.98(1):47-55. Ngan P. The Angle Orthodontist 2002. Dentofacial changes produced by extraoral forward force in the Macaca irus. 88. KiliÁoglu Hl. American Journal of Orthodontics 1977. Ryu Y-K. Tokmak Eá.71(3):249-77. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 1998. 89. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 2009. Yiu C. Goldin B. Merwin D. Jackson GW. Park Y-C.20(3):237-54. Erverdi N.Two dimensional analysis on the sagittal plane of the craniofacial skeleton. 1993. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 1995. An experimental research on the directional control of the nasomaxillary complex by means of an external force.113(4):453-62. Baccetti T. WR P. Soft tissue and dentoskeletal profile changes associated with maxillary expansion and protraction headgear treatment. Clinical results of the maxillary protraction in Korean children. 91. 85. Nanda R.54(3):199-210. Contemporary Orthodontics. Profile changes in patients with class III malocclusions after delaire mask therapy. 94.118(4):414-20. Kim J-H. Biomechanical approaches to the study of alterations of facial morphology. Nanda R.72(5):387-96. 2 ed: Mosby. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 1996. 83. Isik. Andreasen G. Graber TM. Rudolph DJ.78(2):125-39. H‰gg U. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 1997. Mucedero M. Full CA. American Journal of Orthodontics 1979. J Tokyo Dent Coll 1979.76.109(1):38-49. Effect of Varying the Force Direction on Maxillary Orthopedic Protraction. 80. American Journal of Orthodontics 1980. K S. Keles A. 90. Sagittal airwar dimensions following maxillary protraction: a pilot study. Franchi L. 77. Omerza FF. European Journal of Orthodontics 1998. Nanda R. A study of holographic interferometry on the initial reaction of maxillofacial complex during protraction. KirliÁ Y. 87.111(6):623-32. Hirato. J Tokyo Dent Coll 1984. Experimental and postexperimental response to anteriorly directed extraoral force in young Macaca nemestrina. Zygomaticomaxillary Suture Adaptations Incident to AnteriorlyDirected Forces in Rhesus Monkeys. Baik HS. 82. Viana MAG.28(2):184-9. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 1999. 92. American Journal of Orthodontics 1980.108(6):583-92. 78. Evaluation of treatment and posttreatment changes of protraction facemask treatment using the PAR index. Ngan P. Kokich VG. Lee K-G.79:1563-97. Cephalometric and occlusal changes following maxillary expansion and protraction. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 2000. 84.135(6):777-81. Capelozza LFO. 104. et al. Wertz R. Suzuki S. randomized clinical trial. Sagittal changes after maxillary protraction with expansion in Class III patients in the primary.71(4):367-81. Assessment of skeletal and dental changes by maxillary protraction. Cephalometric A point changes during and after maxillary protraction and expansion. American Journal of Orthodontics 1977.58(1):41-66. American Journal of Orthodontics 1970. H‰gg U. Mason B.5:1-46. 96. Postpubertal assessment of treatment timing for maxillary expansion and protraction therapy followed by fixed appliances. American Journal of Orthodontics 1975. McNamara JJA.57(3):219-55.112(3):292-99. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 1998. Boas CV. Ngan P. Suda N. 101.128(3):299-309. Wei SHY. Timing for effective application of anteriorly directed orthopedic force to the maxilla. 69 . Wei SHY. Haas AJ. Wertz RA. Ngan P. Skeletal and dental changes accompanying rapid midpalatal suture opening. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 2000. Vaughn GA. Jacobson A. 100. The effect of maxillary protraction on front occlusion and facial morphology.100(2):171-79.45:227-37. Hirose K. 107.88(4):303-07. mixed. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 1998. 99. Beck M. Ishii-Suzuki M. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 1991. Torres E.114(5):492-502. The "Wits" appraisal of jaw disharmony. Maxillary protraction: Treatment and posttreatment†effects. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 2004. and late mixed dentitions: A longitudinal retrospective study. American Journal of Orthodontics 1970. 105.95. Bjork A. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 1996. Sung SJ. Turley PK. Hagg U. Dreskin M. The effects of maxillary protraction therapy with or without rapid palatal expansion: A prospective. 110. European Journal of Orthodontics 1983. Shanker S. Clarren SK. Midpalatal suture opening: A normative study. Baik HS. Yiu C. Effective treatment plan for maxillary protraction: Is the bone age useful to determine the treatment plan? American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 2000. 109. 102. Early treatment of class III patients to improve facial aesthetics and predict future growth.67(2):125-38. 106. V S. Yiu C. Gallagher RW. Kokich VG. Acta Odontol Scand 1987.1:24-40. Rapid maxillary expansion in the primary and mixed dentitions: A cephalometric evaluation. 98. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 2005. Saadia M. 97. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 1997. Wade D.118(1):55-62.110(4):423-30. 108. Kuroda T. Ngan P. Merwin D. Buschang P. Franchi L.126(5):555-68. Shapiro PA.113(6):612-19. Oswald R. Hiyama S. Baccetti T. 111. Normal and abnormal growth of the mandible: a synthesis of longitudinal cephalometric implant studies over a period of 25 years. Gabriel de Silva Fo O. Miranda F. 103. Koskinen-Moffett L. Palatal expansion: Just the beginning of dentofacial orthopedics. American Journal of Orthodontics 1985. Moon H-B. Hong Kong Dental J 2004. Ankylosed teeth as abutments for maxillary protraction: A case report. PJ W.117(6):66980. 112. Activation-deactivation rapid palatal expansion and reverse headgear in Class III cases. Wang Y-C. Hohl TH. Drescher D. Omnell ML. Tulloch JFC.137(2):274-84. The Angle Orthodontist 1980. Smalley WM. The Angle Orthodontist 2000. 118. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 2010. 120. Opening of Circumaxillary Sutures by Alternate Rapid Maxillary Expansions and Constrictions. Use of Onplants as Stable Anchorage for Facemask Treatment: A Case Report. Singer SL.94(4):285-95. 113. Isci D.75(3):453-60. Martin C. Journal of Clinical Orthodontics 2011. Gunel E. Shapiro PA. Nienkemper M. Henry PJ. Early Class III treatmetn with a Hybrid Hyraz-Mentoplate Combination. Long-Term Posttreatment Evaluation of Rapid Palatal Expansion. Sheller B. 114. Three-dimensional analysis of maxillary protraction with intermaxillary elastics to miniplates. The Angle Orthodontist 2009. Heymann GC. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 1988. Rosenberg I. Chang PMS. Hong Kong Dental J 2009. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 2000. Kau CH. BrÂnemark P-I. Giray B. 122. Pehlivanoglu M. 117. 121. The effects of a modified protraction headgear on maxilla. European Journal of Orthodontics 2010.6:7282. HAAS AJ.106(2):201-05. Alcan T.50(3):189-217. The Angle Orthodontist 2005. 116. Elekdag-Turk S. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 1994.70(3):253-62.123(5):571-77. Kokich VG. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics 2003. 119. 115. 70 . Cornelis M. Osseointegrated Implants as an Adjunct to Facemask Therapy: A Case Report. Razmus T. Iplikcioglu H. Wei SHY. Effect of alternate maxillay expansion and contraction on the maxilla: a pilot study. Keles A.79(2):23034. Hong H. Liou EJ-W.32:706-15. Osseointegrated titanium implants for maxillofacial protraction in monkeys. Cevidanes L. Maxillary protraction to intentionally ankylosed deciduous canines in a patient with cleft palate.44(9):533-9.117(1):27-38. Turk T. Erverdi N. Wilmes B. Ngan P. Enacar A. Qi LG. Ngan P. De Clerck HJ. Li HG. Do-deLatour TB. 123. Facemask therapy with rigid anchorage in a patient with maxillary hypoplasia and severe oligodontia. Ludwig B. The implant placement is by far the most difficult aspect of the procedure. This concept is currently in the design 71 . similar to in multiple prosthetic implant replacements. Future developments may involve the construction of a Cone Beam guided surgical stent. The future directions for this research can be divided into the stability of the outcomes achieved. An alternative would be to design a whole new TAD that would permit the cementation of the skeletally anchored rapid maxillary expander first followed by placement of the TADs through the expander that then connect onto the expander. This is due to the fact that the maxillary implants need to be placed in exact parallel to each other to allow for the correct path of insertion of the skeletally anchored rapid maxillary expander. Future directions: This study examined the efficacy of the utilization of the Alt-RAMEC protocol in conjunction with maxillary and mandibular TADs with Class III elastics in the treatment of the maxillary deficient Class III patient. a simplification of the implant procedure with the use of alternative methods of protraction other than elastics and comparisons can be made to other novel treatment approaches to the treatment of the Class III malocclusion. This is a novel and contemporary approach in the treatment of the malocclusion and hence the stability of the change needs to be evaluated in further studies on the followup of these patients. Another aim could be to assess the future growth of the maxilla and whether this growth is normalised or whether it assumes a reversion back to the original Class III growth pattern.7. The aim of these future studies can be directed towards whether this protraction treatment relapsed in the anteroposterior plane of space and the mangnitude of such relapse. to allow for the proper surgical placement of the TADs. 72 . Alternatively magnets can be used in the skeletally anchored expander and the modified lower lingual arch that can provide the protractive forces required eliminating the need for further components to the appliance and eliminating the patient compliance. The main compliance issue with the treatment protocol has been the expansion and contraction of the maxilla and the daily interchange of the elastics. Numerous articles are being published about innovative. Future developments may involve an expander that expands and contracts itself as per a specific protocol and the development of intra oral springs that attach to the expander and the lower lingual arch which are activated and eliminate the need for patient input. novel treatment approaches to the malocclusion.stages of development by the author. The treatment of the Class III malocclusion using skeletal anchorage is currently a contemporary issue with widespread research into the area. A future direction in the study would be to compare the treatment modality described to other novel treatment approaches to evaluate the efficacy of the treatment outcomes. 8. Appendix Appendix 1 – Appliance design Appendix 2 – Implant placement site Appendix 3 – Patient JW pre treatment Appendix 4 – Patient JW with appliances in situ Appendix 5 – Patient JW post treatment Appendix 6 – Patient JW superimposition Appendix 7 – Cephalometic variables T1 Appendix 8 – Cephalometric variables T2 73 . Appendix 1 Figure 3 – Appliance design (a) Maxilla occlusal 74 . (b) Maxilla left (c) Maxilla right 75 . (d) Mandibular occlusal (e)Mandibular oblique 76 . Appendix 2 – Implant placement site 77 . Appendix 3 – Patient JW pre treatment Extraoral photos of JW 78 . JW intraoral 79 . Appendix 4 – Patient JW with appliances in situ 80 . Appendix 5 – Patient JW post treatment 81 . JW appliances removed 82 . Appendix 6 – Patient JW superimposition 83 . 84 . .5+! ((1! 0/5+! (1*50! 005+! (1.! 7*5)! 7(5)! 7+5/! 7)5-! 7*5/! 715.5(! ..5*! (+)5)! (**5)! (+.! ! /15+! ! /(5-! ! .! (+(5/! ()+5(! (+*5)! (**! ((05*! (*(5(! ()05)! (*0! (*/5-! (+)! (*/5*! (*.5.! ((5)! (+5+! ()5)! 05)! -5)! +5(! (15/! +5)! (15+! *50! 050! (1! -5)! )05.Appendix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ephalometric variables at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ppendix 8 – Cephalometric variables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yku Dalci.9. Nour Tarraf. 89 . Manuscript Treatment of Class III malocclusions using Temporary Anchorage Devices (TADs) and intermaxillary Class III elastics in the growing patient. For the purpose of this thesis this manuscript is extended and will be shortened for publication. Saad Al-Mozany. M Ali Darendeliler This manuscript is to be submitted to the American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopaedics. Carmen Gonzales. PhD Senior Lecturer Discipline of Orthodontics Faculty of Dentistry University of Sydney.Saad A Al-Mozany. Nour Tarraf. BDS(NZ) Doctor of Clinical Dentistry Discipline of Orthodontics Faculty of Dentistry University of Sydney. 90 . MRACDS(Ortho) Lecturer Discipline of Orthodontics Faculty of Dentistry University of Sydney. BDS(Hons). PhD Lecturer Discipline of Orthodontics Faculty of Dentistry University of Sydney. DDS. Carmen Gonzalez DDS. Oyku Dalci. MOrth RCSEd. MDSc(Hons). Ali Darendeliler Professor and Chair Discipline of Orthodontics Faculty of Dentistry University of Sydney Level 2. Address for correspondence: M. Orth. PhD. Doc Professor and Chair Discipline of Orthodontics Faculty of Dentistry University of Sydney.au 91 . Certif.edu. Priv. 2 Chalmers Street Surry Hills. BDS.darendeliler@sydney. NSW 2010 Australia Phone +61 2 93518314 Fax +61 2 93518336 Email: ali.M A Darendeliler. Dip Ortho. .…110 5.…………..…………………………103 Data analysis…………………………………………….…………………………………………….95 3.Table of Contents Table of contents…………………………………………………………………….………………………………….……142 ! ! ! ! ! ! ! 92 ..……………. Conclusion…………………………………………………………. Abstract………………………………………………………………………….... Discussion………………………………………….…92 1.115 7. Introduction………………………………....…………………………. References…………………………………………………………………………117 9.…111 6.…102 Patient selection…………………………………………………………………. Materials and Methods…………...120 10..…………….. List of figures……….102 Treatment protocol…………………………………….....……….…………………………………………….. Acknowledgements………………………………………………….....……………………………. List of tables………………………………………………………...... Results……………………………………………......116 8.….……………………….107 4..93 2. 1 Temporary Anchorage devices (TADs) have opened up a new era in Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopaedics including maxillary protraction treatment. Materials and Methods: 14 subjects (7 male and 7 female) with an average age of 12.!"#$%&'()*'# # +. Two palatal TADs were inserted either side of the midpalatine suture and two TADs were inserted into the anterior mandible between the canines and lateral incisors./*'0-.42 years (range 11.4) were selected from the Sydney University waiting list whom exhibited Class III malocclusions with retrognathic maxillae and who were in the cervical maturation stage of CS2 to CS3. The palatal TADs were connected to a modified bonded palatal expander and the lower TADs were connected to a modified bonded lingual arch. The maxilla was then expanded at 1mm/day for a period of seven days followed by constriction of the maxilla at 1mm/day for 7 days. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of using Temporary Anchorage Devices (TADs) and intermaxillary Class III elastics in growing skeletal 3 patients with retrognathic maxillae whose maxillae were disarticulated using the Alt-RAMEC protocol.'(-. The development of the alternate maxillary contraction and constriction (Alt-RAMEC) technique by Liou has also been to shown to reduce the duration of treatment of these malocclusions with a more pronounced maxillary protraction effect. The introduction of maxillary plates in conjunction with Class III intermaxillary elastics by De Clerk has revolutionized the early treatment of the retrognathic maxilla by eliminating the need for the cumbersome extraoral protraction headgear appliance. Following this Alt-RAMEC protocol intermaxillary Class III elastics were worn 24 hours per day delivering 400gm force as measured by a Correx 93 . This protocol was repeated for nine weeks.2 – 14. 57 weeks of protraction (range 8 – 9 weeks).95o !1. There was a mean increase in the ANB of 3.54mm (p < 0.98o ! 2.guage.28 ! 1. Protraction was ceased when 2mm overjet was achieved. The UI to SN increased by a mean of 2.62 ! 1. The protraction led to a backward and downward rotation of the mandible with a mean change in the Y-axis of 1.22o (p < 0.001). A mean increase in the overjet of 5.05).71o (p < 0. Key words: Class III malocclusion. Rendered lateral cephalograms were then produced and cephalometric measurements were taken and compared.001). however the long term stability of these changes need to be evaluated. The mean horizontal movement of point A was 3.05). Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) scans were taken after TAD placement and at the end of active treatment.2o ! 3.36mm (p < 0. Results: The aim of the study was achieved in all 14 subjects in 9 weeks of AltRAMEC followed by 8.95o ! 0. maxillary protraction 94 . Dental effects included a proclination of the upper incisors coupled with a retroclination of the lower incisors.001). The LI to MP decreased by mean of 3.001) was also observed. Conclusion: The Alt-RAMEC protocol in conjunction with maxillary and mandibular TADs and Class III intermaxillary elastics is an efficient method of treatment maxillary deficient Class III patients eliminating the need for the protaction headgear appliance.4o (p < 0.57o (p < 0. Temporary Anchorage Devices(TADs). all the lower teeth occluded mesial to the normal width of one bicuspid or even more in extreme cases”2. Therefore. it may imply that the malocclusion is associated with a different manner of craniofacial growth when compared with normal occlusion. 95 . the maxilla and/or the mandible. The craniofacial characteristics of the Class III malocclusion may be attributed to both a positional and a dimensional disharmony of numerous components of the craniofacial skeleton involving the cranial base. Introduction The craniofacial anomaly we describe today as the Class III malocclusion was described as early as the 18th century by Bourdet who called “attention to the deformity in children with protruding chins”. anteversion.2. position and form. Many other descriptive terms have been used throughout the literature to denote the malocclusion such as mesial occlusion. Delabarre used the terms “edgeto-edge” and “underbite” to describe the malocclusion. A normal occlusion is generally by a union of a balanced facial skeleton and harmony in the growth between the mandible. form and position with respect to the maxilla and/ or cranial base1. maxilla and cranial base in size. In the 19th century. progenic. Class III malocclusions are characterized as a facial dysplasia produced by excessive growth disharmony of the mandible in size. prenormal. Angle first published his classification of malocclusion in 1899 in which he described Class III as “the relation of the jaws was abnormal. macrognathic and mandibular overbite1. infraversion. The estimates of the malocclusion in these populations ranges from 0.3% to 13% respectively. These patterns may be indicative characteristics of a Class III malocclusion and have been estimated to range between 2. Middle Eastern population as high as 9. If the frequency of occurrence of these two manifestations of Class III malocclusion are combined then a substantial percentage of the Japanese population has characteristics of Class III malocclusion4.8% to 4.2%6-8 with a slightly higher prevalence in men of Swedish descent which has been reported to be as high as 6%8. The prevalence of Class III malocclusion has also been investigated for the European American and African American populations and has been estimated as 96 . Numerous studies have investigated the incidence rates for the differing population groups. In comparison to people of Asian or Middle Eastern ancestry. The incidence of Class III malocclusions in the Japanese populations has not been investigated in detail.7% to 7. The recurring theme of the characteristic growth of the malocclusion is that it is not self-correcting and will worsen with time. The prevalence of Class III malocclusion in the Chinese population has been estimated as high as 12%3.There is a paucity of data on the growth characteristics of Class III malocclusions. but also due to the well recognized need for early intervention by both the public and dental professionals. The incidence of Class III malocclusions differs between different ethnic groups.4 %5. Class III malocclusions are especially common in patients of Asian ancestry. This is not only because of the relatively low prevalence of this malocclusion in the different ethnic groups.4% and 2. Class III malocclusions are seen less often in people of Northern European ancestry. Instead estimates of prevalence in the Japanese population of anterior crossbite and edge to edge relationships have been established. There has also been a reported increase in prevalence of Class III malocclusion in the Saudi Arabian. 19.6% consisted of both a neutral maxilla and mandible.8% and 0.33% consisted of a protrusive maxilla and a retrusive mandible. 19.6% consisted of a protrusive maxilla and a normal mandible and finally 0. Ellis10 in his cephalometric sample of 302 adult patients of both sexes found that 30. The size and relative positions of the cranial base.0.2% respectively9. 4.5% consisted of maxillary retrusion with normal mandibular prominence. These variations in the prevalence of the malocclusion in the different ethnic groups has led to differences in the research data which is being produced with regards to the malocclusion in various parts of the world.9% consisted of both maxillary and mandibular retrusion. 1. 7. another 1. 97 . mandible. the position of the temporomandibular articulation and any displacement of the lower jaw will affect both the sagittal and vertical relationships of the teeth.1% consisted of a combination of maxillary retrusion and mandibular protrusion. Therefore various different combination or anomalies in these components can culminate in the presentation of a Class III malocclusion.6% consisted of a neutral maxilla and a retrusive mandible. As indicated by these studies the prevalence of Class III malocclusion has a racial predilection with the highest prevalence being in individuals of Asian ancestry and the lowest prevalence being in individuals of European ancestry. The characteristics of Class III malocclusion involve the entire facial complex with factors acting synergistically. in isolation or so as to cancel each other out.9% consisted of maxillary and mandibular protrusion.2% consisted of mandibular protrusion with a normal maxilla 14. maxilla.6-1. a shorter maxilla that was more retrusive. The most well known example of this is the Hapsburg family. with a specific increase in the mandibular body length with the mandibular articulation more ventrally placed. She confirmed the multifactorial aeitiology of Class III malocclusion as a reduction in the cranial base angle. The few studies of human inheritance and its role in Class III malocclusion support the belief that growth and size of the mandible are determined by heredity.Guyer 11 in his cephalometric sample of 144 children. The aeitiology of Class III malocclusion can be categorised as either genetic or environmental in origin. Tollaro13 also investigated the morphological characteristics of the Class III malocclusion in the deciduous dentition. The distinctive facial feature of this family was the prognathic lower jaw. Of the 40 members of the family. Her sample consisted of 69 Class III subjects and she compared this to a sample of Class I malocclusions. She found that the anterior cranial base length was significantly reduced. the Class III maxillae were both generally more retrusive and shorter. for whom records were available. 98 . protruding lower lip and the characteristic “Hapsburg nose” with its prominent dorsal hump. an overall mandibular length excess. demonstrated that the posterior cranial base length was considerably longer in Class III subjects. with an increase in the length of the mandibular ramus and the body in the Class III sample compared to the control sample. 33 showed prognathic mandibles8. Battagel12 studied the cephalometric characteristics retrospectively in her sample of 495 children both male and female. The Class III effective length of the mandible was longer and more prognathic compared to the Class I controls. the former Austro-Hungarian royal family. Aperts syndrome and Crouzons syndrome. Environmental influences such as mouth breathing and forward posture of the mandible have also been associated with the aetiology of Class III malocclusion. The advent of the retrusive Class III pattern in Cleft lip and Palate patients may be due to the scarring affect of the lip and palatal repair.Litton14 studied the families of 51 individuals with severe Class III anomalies and found that one third of the group had a parent who presented with a Class III malocclusion and one sixth had an affected sibling. to intervention after the patient has completed their active growth. Some environmental causes that have also been attributed include patients with chromosomal defects including Cleft lip and palate patients and certain syndromes such as Achondroplasia. Aperts and Crouzons syndrome are generally characterized by premature synostosis of the cranial sutures restricting maxillary growth. it should be noted that these syndromes are the result of an underlying chromosomal. Although the midface deficiency that is characteristic of these craniofacial syndromes has been attributed to environmental factors. genetic defect and should therefore be classified as of genetic origin. The timing of treatment varies from early intervention during the pre-pubertal stages of growth. However a simple environmental cause appears unlikely with the main aeitiology being genetic in nature. which has the effect of restricting the anteroposterior and transverse maxillary development. Treatment of the Class III malocclusion poses a challenge to the clinician. Therefore genetics seems to play a distinctive role in the expression of the Class III malocclusion. The treatment 99 . The protraction facemask therapy leads both dental and skeletal effects including a forward movement of the maxilla. An elaboration of this procedure where the maxilla is alternately expanded and constricted (Alt-RAMEC) has been demonstrated to produce a more pronounced “disarticulation” effect allowing for a greater amount of maxillary protraction in a considerably reduced amount time16.modalities range from dentofacial orthopaedic treatment. This eliminates the need for the cumbersome extraoral headgear appliance and the protraction is maintained full time. Recently. The expansion is intended to open the circummaxillary sutures or “disarticulate” the maxilla to allow for its protraction. to camouflage orthodontic treatment to a combined orthognathic surgical and orthodontic approach. The recent incorporation of skeletal anchorage into the discipline of orthodontics has led to their utilization in the orthopedic treatment of Class III malocclusions. This involves using a cumbersome extra-oral appliance for 14-16 hours per day. 100 . surgical plates have been placed in the maxilla and mandible under general anesthetic and intermaxillary Class III elastics have been worn full time to protract the maxilla17. downward and backwards movement of the mandible with proclination of the maxillary incisors and retroclination of the mandibular incisors. Protraction facemask with maxillary expansion has been advocated as one of the treatment modalities in the early treatment of Class III malocclusion15. there have been no studies that investigate the effectiveness of the AltRAMEC protocol to “disarticulate” the maxilla in conjunction with 24 hour intermaxillary Class III elastic wear coupled with the use of TADs in the mandible and the maxilla to protract the maxilla. 101 .To date. The aim of this study is to quantitatively analyse the effects of the Alt-RAMEC protocol in conjunction with Temporary Anchorage Devices (TADs) and intermaxillary Class III elastics on the growing patient. Materials and Methods Patient selection Ethics approval was obtained from the Human Research Ethics Committee of New South Wales Health [The Human Ethics Review Committee – SSWAHS (RPAH zone) Approval number X10-010].Anterior crossbite. 102 . 6. 4. A parent sample consisting of 42 patients was selected from the treatment waiting list of the Orthodontic Department of the Faculty of Dentistry at the University of Sydney.Retrognathic maxilla.No previous orthodontic or orthopaedic treatment. All patients and their guardians were informed of the study protocol. The patients were examined clinically by another clinician to confirm the inclusion criteria based on the above characteristics.Cervical Vertebral Maturational Stage 2 or stage 3. Of the 42 selected.Dental Class III molars and canines 7.2 – 14.3. Written informed consent was gained from the parents or guardians of all the patients. 14 patients (7 male and 7 females. These patients were initially screened as having Class III malocclusions. age range 11.Skeletal Class III malocclusion. 2. The study was also registered with the ANZ clinical trial registry (ACTRN12610000220066). 5.No congenital abnormalities.4 years) met the inclusion criteria. The inclusion criteria consisted of patients with the following characteristics: 1.42 years. 3. the advantages of the treatment and the complications associated with the treatment. mean age 12. Treatment Protocol The treatment protocol consisted of insertion of the TADs under local anaesthetic. The palatal TAD insertion site was either side of the midpalatine suture in the area distal to the canines and mesial to the first molars (Figure 1).000 adrenalin) was then administered as palatal infiltrations either side of the midpalatine suture in the prospective TAD placement sites until the blanching of the palatal mucosa was observed.No control group was included in this study. Local anaesthetic solution (2% lignocaine with 1:80. These included extra-oral photographs (frontal. both right and left local mandibular buccal infiltrations were administered using local 103 . the prevalence of Class III malocclusions in our population pool was relatively low therefore acquiring a sufficient sample would be difficult. standard orthodontic records were obtained from all subjects. CBCT Newtom scans and both maxillary and mandibular alginate impressions. Firstly. intraoral photographs (frontal. left and right buccal. left and right profile. The mandibular TAD insertion site was between the canine and the lateral incisor. resting lip position. Secondly substantial ethics and moral dilemmas arise from denying patients with severe occlusal deformity such as a Class III malocclusion treatment. 45 degree left and right profile). for two reasons. Prior to placement of the TADs the prospective implant site was swabbed with 0. 3dMD 3 dimensional photographs were also taken of each patient prior to treatment and after treatment. smiling. maxillary and mandibular occlusal).12% chlorhexidine solution. Prior to the commencement of the study. Following this. These were acquired using a NewTom 3G (QR. Pilot holes were then created using a high speed surgical handpiece at 800 rpm under sodium chloride irrigation. The mandibular TADs chosen were self drilling 1. The width of the pilot drills was increased to 1. Italy) with a 12” Field of 104 . The TADs chosen for the palatal were 2 x 9 mm MondealTM (GAC) TADs. The mandibular TADs were then placed. A minimum clearance of 5 mm between the two palatal TADs was given to enable the placement of the impression caps.2% chlorhexidine swab was then done to the prospective TAD placement sites. Separators were then placed interdentally around the lower first molars. Both the palatal TADs were placed parallel to each other and either side of the midpalatal suture. The area of the palatal TAD placement was marked with a periodontal probe and the thickness of the soft tissue was measures with an endo-stopper.5 mm as per the manufacturers instructions for the 2 mm width implant. American Orthodontics) TADs. During this time another 0. These TADs were placed initially at a perpendicular angulation to the labial bone. Verona. The palatal TADs were then placed under a maximum insertion torque setting of 35 Ncm using a contra-angle hand piece with a speed reduction of a minimum of 10:1 to achieve a 30rpm (recommended insertion torque 10 to 25 Ncm). The depths of the pilot holes were then increased until bicortical engagement was achieved. Insertion was complete when the head of the TAD was flush with the labial mucosa. Healing caps were then placed on the palatal TADs.6 x 6mm AarhusTM (Medicon eG. The palatal TADs were then placed. Sufficient time was then given for the areas to anaesthetize. Both insertion directions were not too divergent. The patients were sent for a Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) scan.anaesthetic. Once engagement of the TAD was achieved the insertion angle was altered to approximately a 30 degree angle to the buccal alveolar plate. The patients then presented after 1 week where the lower separators were removed and molar bands are fitted to the lower first molars. A bonded Rapid Maxillary Expander (RME) was then constructed by the lab and welded to MondealTM (GAC. Polyvinylsiloxane (PVS) impressions were then taken of the maxillary arch (Figure 2a) with the transfer abutments in place. The patients were then discharged on a 2mg/ml chlorhexidine mouthrinse (Savacol.b. The impression was then removed with the transfer abutments in the impression tray. The parallelism of the TADs was then checked again. One week later the patients present for cementation of the upper skeletal anchored RME (Figure 3 a. A trial insertion was carried out to check whether the path of 105 . Alcohol free. The palatal healing caps were removed and transfer impression copings placed onto them. Australia) standard abutments which connected connect the RME to the TADs thus producing a skeletally anchored RME. An impression was then taken of the maxillary arch with the transfer abutments in place (Figure 2a).c). the laboratory mini implants analogues were positioned on the impression transfer abutments. The three dimensional relationships of the TADs in the oral cavity was thus duplicated on the plaster model. After impression taking. The impression was then poured up in the laboratory for a modified lingual arch to be constructed. A medium bodied PVS impression was injected around the transfer abutments whilst the impression tray was filled with a heavy bodied PVS. Separators were then placed back around the mandibular molars. Alginate impression were then taken of the mandibular arch with the molar bands in place (Figure 2b). Colgate).View (FOV). This is done by unwinding the expander. This was then secured to the TAD with a flowable composite. One week later the patients present for assessment of the expansion achieved. After 9 weeks of alternating expansion and contraction the mobility of the maxilla was subjectively assessed. the patients were then instructed to constrict the bone anchored RME 1mm/day for 7 days. The patient is then instructed to expand the skeletal anchored RME 1mm/day for 7 days. They were then seen to assess their progress. It is then cemented into place with GIC. If this “disarticulation” was achieved then the intermaxillary protraction can be commenced. This is done by supporting the forehead and bridge of nose with one hand and holding the maxillary incisors with another.e) is also tried in. A 19 x 25 stainless steel wire was then bent to fit passively into the cross head of the AarhusTM screw bilaterally. If satisfactory. If satisfactory then the patienst are advised to continue this expansion constriction cycle for another 4 weeks. Sufficient mobility of the maxilla must be detected and was achieved on all patients. Lingually the lingual cleats were bonded onto the lingual surfaces of the teeth with a composite resin. The maxilla was then moved in an anterior then posterior direction in a back and forth motion.insertion of the RME is correct and that the abutments fit passively on the TADs. The modified lower lingual arch (Figure 3 d. If satisfactory the cycle is continued until week 9 is reached. The patients then present one week later and the constriction was assessed. The opposite part of the stainless steel wire was bent to fit passively against 106 . Once this is checked the appliance is then cemented into place with a Glass Ionomer Cement (GIC). Sufficient time was spent with the patients to make sure they are able to do this properly. the labial surface of the mandibular lateral incisors bilaterally. These were bonded to the teeth with a composite resin. A correx guage was then used to measure a 400 gm force of elastics that run from ball clasps (Romanium, Dentaurum) imbedded bucally into the skeletal anchored RME to hooks on the modified mandibular lingual arch. The modified lingual arch was constructed from 1mm romanium wire (Dentaurum, Australia). 16 Oz elastics were then used. 2 elastics run from the posterior ball clasps on the skeletal anchored RME to the “S” hook on the modified lingual arch whist 1 elastic runs from the anterior hook on the bone anchored RME to the mandibular lingual arch (Figure 4). This was done to prevent counterclockwise rotation of the maxilla. The patient was then instructed to change the elastics once a day. The patient was then assesses in 2 week intervals until 2 mm positive overjet was achieved. Once the 2mm overjet was achieved the appliances were removed. Post treatment CBCT scans are then taken as well as 3dMD 3 dimensional photographs, standard photos and alginate study models. The patient then commences full fixed appliance therapy with early employments of Class III intermaxillary traction to maintain the anteroposterior correction. The pre, in-treatment and post treatment records of patient SM (Figure 5 - 7) and AD (Figure 8 - 10) are demonstrated. Data analysis Cone beam computed tomograms (CBCT) were taken after the palatal and mandibular TADs were placed at T1 and at the end of the protraction phase T2. These tomograms were acquired using Newtom 3G (QR, Verona, Italy) with a 12” FOV. The DICOM 107 data that was obtained from the CBCTs was processed to produce rendered lateral cephalograms, using Dolphin Imaging system (version 11.0, Dolphin Imaging & Management Systems, Chatsworth, California). All the cephalograms were digitally traced by one investigator (S.A) using the dolphin software. Thirty nine conventional cephalometric measurements were included consisting of 17 angular measurements (SNA, SNB, ANB, SN/PP, PP/MP, MP/SN, OP/SN, Gonial Angle (Go), UI/SN, UI/PP, LI/MP, Interincisal angle, Y axis, Facial axis, SN/basion, NL angle and H angle) and 22 linear measurements (PA – Face height, N-ANS, ANS-ME, UFH, LFH, UI-NPog, UI-Apog, LI-Apog, Overjet, Overbite, S-N, FH-SN, Wits appraisal, Wits, GO-Me, COGn, Co-A, L difference, U lip to S line, L lip to S line, U lip thickness, U lip thickness at point A). In addition 3 linear horizontal measurements were taken from the more recently described stable basicranial line (SBL)18. These were Vert-A, Vert-B and VertPog. Cephalometric analysis was based on a stable basicranial reference system, appropriate for longitudinal studies started in the early developmental ages. First, the stable basicranial line (SBL) was traced through the most superior point of the anterior wall of sella turcica at the junction with tuberculum sellae (point T), drawn tangent to lamina cribrosa of the ethmoid bone. These basicranial structures do not undergo remodeling after the age of 4 or 5 years19. Second, the vertical T (VertT), a line constructed perpendicular to SBL and passing through point T, was traced (Figure 11). The following linear measurements were taken to assess sagittal relationships: A– VertT, B–VertT, Pog–VertT. An error measurements (Dahlberg’s formula) study was done to evaluate the intraexaminer reliability, one month after initial tracings. In this study, the method error did not exceed 0.98mm for linear measurements and 0.87o for angular measurements. 108 Statistical analysis of the cephalometric data was performed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS, ver. 17.0, SPSS Inc., Chicago, Illinois) to compare each variable from T1 to T2, using paired-sample t-tests. 109 28 ! 1.05).001).98o ! 2. This occurred prior to the elastic protraction.36mm (p < 0.2 mm (p < 0. This was replaced the same day and therefore the patient also remained in the study.001).001). The protraction led to a backward and downward rotation (clockwise) of the mandible with a mean change in the Y-axis of 1.95o ! 0.95o !1.4o (p < 0.54mm (p < 0.4.62 ! 1. A mean reduction in the overjet of 5. 110 .71o (p < 0.05). Dental effects included a proclination of the upper incisors coupled with a retroclination of the lower incisors.001). Results The aim of the study was achieved in all 14 subjects in 8. The increase in N-ANS was not statistically significant.57 weeks of protraction (range 8 – 9 weeks) following 9 weeks of Alt-RAMEC application with no major complications. There was a mean reduction in the ANB of 3.5mm (p < 0. however there was a significant increase in ANS-Me of 3.22o (p<0.001). The TAD was replaced the same day and the patient remained in the study. One patient had the buccal attachment on the modified lingual arch fracture during elastic loading.19 ! 2. The mean change in the Wits measurement was 5.16 ! 1.2o ! 3. The data from the pretreatment (T1) and post treatment (T2) protraction lateral cephalographs are summarized in Table 1. The UI to SN increased by a mean of 2. One mandibular TAD was lost from 1 patient during the Alt-RAMEC phase.57o (p < 0. The LI to MP decreased by mean of 3. The mean horizontal movement of point A was 3.001) was also observed. The expansion screw consisted of a 0.5mm/turn expander.01) 5.35 !1.There was no significant change in the NL angle. It is hypothesized that this expansion protocol leads to a more pronounced disarticulation of the maxilla than using maxillary expansion alone. 22. Conventional maxillary expansion prior to maxillary protraction treatment ranges from activation of the expander from 3 times a week to once or twice daily for a period of 710 days15.8mm in this time. Sung and Baik23 found the treatment time in their sample to be 8 to 9 111 .62 (p <0.08 ! 1.18mm (p < 0. the Alt-RAMEC16 protocol was utilized to produce a more pronounced disarticulation effect of the maxilla rather than using maxillary expansion alone.540 (p < 0. The protocol utilized the expansion of the maxilla for 1mm/day for 1 week followed by constriction of the maxilla for 1mm/day for 1 week. Liou demonstrated that the anterior movement of point A was 5. The UL-S line increased by 1. The expander used utilized TADs inserted into the palate and is therefore described as a skeletally anchored rapid maxillary expander. Therefore the patients activated the screw twice daily. 21. Discussion In the present study. Liou16 reported that the Alt-RAMEC produced a maxillary advancement that was two to three times that of maxillary advancement alone. This cycle was repeated for 9 weeks.34mm ! 1.01) while the LL – S line decreased by 1. The mean change in the H angle was 3. This hypothesis was corroborated by Wang20 who demonstrated that Alt-RAMEC opened the sagitally and coronally running circummaxillary sutures quantitatively more than the maxillary expansion group alone. The correction of the Class III malocclusion was completed in 2 months of protraction.001). Merwin 24 treated patients with protraction headgear in the age range of 9 to 12 years old and demonstrated a 2.97mm in the 13 year old age group. This could be attributed to a combination of the disarticulation effect of the Alt-RAMEC protocol on the maxilla in combination with the incorporation of the palatal and mandibular TADs and the full time utilization of the Class III intermaxillary elastics.42 years in a mean treatment time of 8. This anterior movement of point A is significantly greater than the amounts produced in previous studies and is achieved in a reduced amount of time.1mm anterior movement of point A. These changes can be attributed to a combination of vertical maxillary movement. The amount of forward movement of point A was 0.97 anterior movement of point A in a 10-14 year age group. Cha25 demonstrated a reduced amount of anterior movement of point A. The biomechanical effects of the protraction headgear lead to these changes. 112 . 26-29 .7 mm of point A in their sample of 129 patients between 7 and 12 years of age. Kapust26 demonstrated a 1. Posterior rotation of the mandible with an accompanied increase in the anterior facial height is a common treatment effect in protraction headgear treatment24. The mean anterior movement of point A in the present study was 3.months with an average movement of 1.28mm in patients with a mean age of 12. extrusion of the maxillary molars and a chin cup type effect of the heavy Class III elastics employed that may result in the production of a retractive force on the mandible.71 weeks. Similar changes were observed in this study with a significant increase in the anterior facial height accompanied by a significant increase in the Y-axis. surgical plates and intentionally ankylosed deciduous teeth have been utilized with protraction headgear treatment17. the dentoalveolar side effects of a proclination of the upper incisors and retroclination of the lower incisors were still observed.Conventional facial orthopaedics has utilized the dentition for the transmission of the orthopaedic forces to the underlying skeletal structures including the maxilla and the mandible. This is due to the fact that the adaptability of the sutures and their response to the protraction forces decreases with age34. 33. 32. This was attributed to the flexibility of the arms in the appliances used. This was done with a 19 x 25 SS wire. However. The average treatment ago of the patients in 113 . Similarly the arms that connect the palatal TADs to the acrylic pads of the upper bonded skeletally anchored RME may have flexed under the protractive effect of the Class III elastics on the maxilla allowing for proclination of the maxillary incisors. Therefore correction of the malocclusion was due to a combination of the skeletal affects observed and the unwanted dentoalveolar side effects of the treatment30. 31. It is recommended that protraction facemask therapy be started before the age of 8 years24. The inherent flexibility in the wire may have contributed to allow some distal flexion due to the effect of the heavy Class III elastics allowing for retroclination of the lower incisors. The lower TADs were bonded to both the lateral mandibular incisors. proclination of the upper incisors. retroclination of the lower incisors and mesialisation of the maxillary posterior dentition. These side effects included extrusion of the maxillary molars. To eliminate these unwanted dental side effects the incorporation of TADs. In the present study the incorporation of the TADs was done to eliminate the dental compensations associated with maxillary protraction treatment. This has lead to the unwanted side effects of dentoalveolar compensations rather than the desired alterations in facial growth. this study was 12. Therefore the combination of both skeletal and dentoalveolar changes which were oberseved in our study lead to an overall normalization of the overjet and change in the facial convexity of the patients from an unaesthetic concave profile to a normal. 114 . This was seen by a significant improvement in the H angle of these patients and a forward movement of the upper lip in relation to the to the S line. slightly convex profile.42 years old. The significant maxillary skeletal effect that was observed is attributed to a combination of both the Alt-RAMEC protocol which disarticulated the maxilla sufficiently for its protraction and the incorporation of the TADs which allowed for an increasing amount of the protraction force to be directly transmitted to the maxilla. This treatment protocol achieved significant skeletal protraction of the maxilla in a considerably reduced amount of time. However the long term stability of these pronounced changes need to be evaluated. Conclusion The combination of the Alt-RAMEC protocol to disarticulate the maxillary complex and the use of TADs in the maxilla and mandible in conjunction with intermaxillary Class III elastics is an efficient and well-tolerated method for the treatment of the maxillary deficient Class III patient. 115 .6. Dr. Peter Petocz. Acknoledgements We wish to thank the following individuals for their contribution to this manuscript. Department of Mathematical Sciences. The Australian Society of Orthodontics Foundation for Research and Education for their continued support for the study. Macquarie University. 116 .7. American Orthodontics for their generosity in the donation of materials and equipment used during the study. #:)35(?(&3-01#!E\FGF!I\KLJQ[OJF"# R)(DA%&#_="#+5/#W)('7/A#(.%0/#?/.()#D)(4-&D#.# A%7(007>1-(&#%A(&D#1/&-()#5-D5#105((7#13>?/&31#-&#>W13%3/#@/4#^()8"# CA/)-0%&#X(>)&%7#(.7%11#<<<#A%7(007>1-(&1#-&#35/#?/0-?>(>1#?/&3-3-(&L#%# A()W5(7(D-0%7#%&?#0())/7%3-(&#13>?V"#P>)(W/%&#X(>)&%7#(.7%11#<<<#A%7(07>1-(&"#2)-3-15#X(>)&%7#(."#+5/#W)/]%7/&0/#%&?#05%)%03/)-13-01#(.#:)35(?(&3-01#%&?#.-0-/&0V"#X(>)&%7#(?#:)%7#%&?# =%b-77(..(UU%#9"#:)35(W/?-0#+)/%3A/&3# :>30(A/1#-&#."#:)35(W%/?-0#3)%03-(&#(.(7#S..#%?>73#07%11#<<<#A%7(007>1-(&"# X(>)&%7#(.%)7(1#X9Z#.7%11-.#..#:)35(?(&3-01# !EEJG!\IFKLJM!ON"# $#S"#C#D/&/3-0#13>?V#(./&3(.7%11#<<<# =%7(007>1-(&#%&?#@()A%7#:007>1-(&B"#+5/#C&D7/#:)35(?(&3-13# !EFFGHFIJKLHMNOHH"# P#C"#.#A%7(007>1-(&"#.%0-%7#:)35(W/?-01#!E[MGFNLF\FO[["# 2%00/33-#+Z#=0a-77#X$Z#6)%&05-#SZ#=0@%A%)%#XXCZ#+(77%)(#<"#$8/7/3%7#/.7%11#<<<#A%7(007>1-(&#4-35#A%b-77%)V#/bW%&1-(&#%&?# ..(1A(1#!NEEGJ!LHJN"# R#S"#T()-U(&3%7#18/7/3%7#3VW-&D#-&#%&#/35&-0#.2Z#.# :)35(?(&3-01#!EF!GQ[IJKLHFQO[\"# X%0('1(&#CZ#P]%&1#_aZ#9)/13(&#.(&1#@.7%11#<<<# W%3-/&31L#%#07-&-0%7#%WW7-0%3-(&#1-A>7%3/?#?-13)%03-(&#(13/(D/&/1-1"#9)(D)/11# <&#:)35(?(&3-01#HMMFG\IHKL!FJO[!"# T#.%0-%7# :)35(W/?-01#!EENG!!QIQKLQQQOJQ"# S-(>#PXO_"#P.Z#2%00/33-#+Z#6)%&05-#SZ#./&3(.(AW(&/&31#(.#0)%&-(.%0-%7#$>)D/)V#!ENJGJHIFKLHEFOQMF"# a>V/)#P..7%11#<<<#=%7(007>1-(&"#+5/#C&D7/#:)35(?(&3-13# HMMNG[NIQKLF\!O[Q"# =/71/&#2"#+5/#0)%&-%7#'%1/"#C03%#:?(&3(7#$0%&?#!E[JGQHI\HKLJ!O[!"# 117 .%0-%7#:)35(W/?-01#!EE[G!!HIJKLJHFOQJ"# C#+"#.5-&/1/#W(W>7%3-(&#4-35#3)>/# .# :)35(?(&3-01#%&?#.#05-7?)/&#"#@%3-(&%7#0/&3)/# .Z#P77-1#PPZ#=0@%A%)%#XCZ#2/5)/&31#*a"#.#.7%11#<<<#./&3(.%0/OA%18#35/)%WV"#CA/)-0%&#X(>)&%7#(./A%7/#4-35#%&3/)-()#0)(11'-3/"#CA/)-0%&# X(>)&%7#(.#`3-A-&D`#-&#./&3%7#.#:)35(?(&3-01#%&?#.7%11#<<<#A%7(007>1-(&"#P>)(W/%&# X(>)&%7#(.7%11#<<<#A%7(007>1-(&"#CA/)-0%&#X(>)&%7#(.#:)35(?(&3-01#!E[JG\\IHKL!JMO[!"# R/77V"#C&#%11/11A/&3#(./03-]/#A%b-77%)V#()35(W%/?-0#W)(3)%03-(&#.%0-%7#D)(435Z#4-35#1W/0-%7# )/.7%11#<<<#A%7(007>1-(&L#C#0/W5%7(A/3)-0#13>?V#(.#35/#3//35#(.()#5/%735#13%3-13-01#!E[QI[JO!\!HK"# P77-1#<--#PZ#=0@%A%)%#X)#XC"#./)/&0/1#2/34//&#35/#6%0-%7#$8/7/3%7#9%33/)&1#:.-.#.#A-?./)/&0/#3(#35/#W/)-(?#(.-0%3-(&#(.#:)%7#%&?#=%b-77(.%03()1#-&#.2Z#$%?(418V#9S"#=%&?-'>7%)#W)(D&%35-1A"# CA/)-0%&#X(>)&%7#(.#35/#A%b--7%#4-35#A-&-W7%3/1L#C#&/4# W/)1W/03-]/#.# /%)7V#3)/%3A/&3#(.#:)35(?(&3-01#!EEQGHMI!KL!MOHQ"# =-V%Y-A%#RZ#=0@%A%)%#XXCZ#$%&%#=Z#=>)%3%#$"#C&#/13-A%3-(&#(.#(007>1-(&#(.#35/#05%&D-&D#?/&3-3-(&"#CA/)-0%&#X(>)&%7#(.#$%>?-#C)%'-%&1"#2)-3-15# X(>)&%7#(.7%11#<<<# =%7(007>1-(&#-&#X>]/&-7/1#%&?#C?(7/10/&31"#+5/#C&D7/#:)35(?(&3-13# !EN\GF\I!KL[OQM"# 2%33%D/7"#+5/#%/-3-(7(D-0%7#.%0-%7# D)(435#-&#35/#>&3)/%3/?#.#:)35(?(&3-01#!ENEG!\IQKLHM!OM\"# C13#.()#3)/%3A/&3#(./031#(. References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email protected]'A2<B$&'F$T9'A3:&<2&?$7.2<&'$634.2<&'$634.?9@$.3.$+-94'($5.&<A23'M$D$<&B9$.348B#$D=9..&8-2<$BA4F@#$D=9.3A.$\(&'$.A-389F2<$9::9<AB$3:$&$=3F2:29F$=&>2??&.$02'<?&2.@$ 8.3A.$X&2Y$Z0#$DBB9BB=9'A$3:$BY9?9A&?$&'F$F9'A&?$<-&'(9B$C@$=&>2??&.$W&=3(&B-2.@$8.3B89<A2S9$BA4F@#$D=9.W#$+98-&?3=9A.9B<-9.&<A23'$Q2A-$ 9>8&'B23'$2'$+?&BB$RRR$8&A29'AB$2'$A-9$8.3A.9B$5#$0&(2AA&?$<-&'(9B$&:A9.&A23'$ ^.$RS9$6+.$)24$+.&c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d^.@$8.$7BQ&?F$E.A-389F2<B$ PHVJIHPKOLMN"[*PP#$ +-3'($)*Z..9<A9F$3.3A.A-389F2<B$PHHJIPP!KNLM!H!*HH#$ +-&$W*0#$0Y9?9A&?$+-&'(9B$3:$/&>2??&.&<A23'$ -9&F(9&.&$W.$04c4Y2$D#$+3=8&.$\&Y&(&Q&$/.2<&'$634.9<A23'$3:$+?&BB$RRR$=&?3<<?4B23'M$.$W3BY2'9'*/3::9AA$1.A-3F3'A2BA$PHHUIUUK[LMN[P*U!#$ W&b2@&=&$W.&8@#$634.99$0Y9?9A&?$/&A4.9B83'B9$&'F$?3'(*A9.2B3'$3:$3.3A.=$ F9'A3:&<2&?$&F&8A&A23'B$A3$=&>2??&.23.'&?$3:$ 7.'&?$3:[email protected]'$3:$.A#$ D=9.B$ 2'$7..A-3F3'A2<B$PHV[IVVKOLMN"N*"J#$ %2?=9B$X.&<A3.D.2<&'$634.A-3F3'A2<B$&'F$T9'A3:&<2&?$7.&'23:&<2&?$ <3=8?9>#$D=9.$/4.$T#$5&.'&?$3:$+?2'2<&?$7.&<A23'$`&<9=&BY$E9B83'B9$ ]B2'($X&'F9F$&'F$X3'F9F$5>8&'B23'$D88?2&'<9B$&B$D'<-3.2<$9::9<AB$3:$:&<9$ =&BY_9>8&'B23'$A-9.3QA-$BA4F29F$3'$-4=&'$&4A38B@$=&A9.?@$=2>9F$F9'A2A23'B#$D=9.2B3'$3:$A-..W#$7.$%92$0Z)#$+3=8&.9A9'A23'$&'F$ 8-&B9$RR$A-9.&?&A&?$(.A-3F3'A2<B$&'F$T9'A3:&<2&?$7.$+?&.@$8.A-3F3'A2<B$PHJ[IUVKPLMO!* [O#$ $ 118 .$+-&'($.9&A=9A'$Q2A-$&[email protected].$Z&(($].@$04A4.'&?$3:$7.$√a.'&?$3:$ 7.3A.A-3F3'A2<$&'F$ 3.&(9#$09=2'&.@$.?@$<3.2=&.99$&(9$ (.9'M$D$<3=8&.$\29'Y9=89.?@$F2.$=2>9F.A-3F3'A2<B$!""JIPNKNLMPJ[*V[#$ \(&'$.?9@$.$%92$0Z)#$G2=2'($:3.3A..A-3F3'A2BA$!""HIJHK!LM!N"*NO#$ 0&&F2&$/.$&'F$?&A9$=2>9F$ F9'A2A23'BM$D$?3'(2A4F2'&?$.@$8. 119 . ! views and smiling frontal (c) Intraoral Figure 8 – Patient AD at T1 (a) Extraoral. ! views and smiling frontal (c) Intraoral Figure 9 – Patient AD with appliances in situ Figure 10 – Patient AD at T2 (a) Extraoral. ! views and smiling frontal (c) Intraoral Figure 11 – Cephalometric landmarks identification and legend Figure 12 – Superimpositions SM T1 and T2 Figure 13 – Superimpositions AD T1 and T2 120 . profile and frontal (b) Extraoral. profile and frontal (b) Extraoral. profile and frontal (b) Extraoral. List of figures: Figure 1 – Implant placement sites Figure 2 – Implant impressions (a) Maxilla (b) Mandible Figure 3 – Appliance design (a) Maxilla occlusal (b) Maxilla left (c) Maxilla right (d) Mandibular occlusal (e) Mandibular oblique Figure 4 – Appliances in situ with elastics loaded Figure 5 – Patient SM at T1 (a) Extraoral.9. ! views and smiling frontal (c) Intraoral Figure 6 – Patient SM with appliances in situ Figure 7 – Patient SM at T2 (a) Extraoral. profile and frontal (b) Extraoral. Figure 1 – Implant placement sites Maxillary implant placement sites: Either side of the midpalatal suture in parallel to each other. 121 . Implants are placed distal to the maxillary canines and mesial to the maxillary first molars to prevent damaging vital structures. Figure 2 – Implant impressions (a) Maxilla PVS impression maxillary arch with impression transfer copings in place (b) Mandible Alginate impression of mandibular arch with molar bands in place 122 . Figure 3 – Appliance design (a) Maxilla occlusal (b) Maxilla left 123 . (c) Maxilla right (d) Mandibular occlusal 124 . (e) Mandibular oblique 125 . Figure 4 – Appliances in situ with elastics loaded 2 elastics run from the posterior hooks of the skeletally anchored RME to the hook on the modified mandibular lingual arch. 1 elastic runs from the anterior hook of the skeletally anchored RME to the hook on the modified mandibular lingual arch. 126 Figure 5 – Patient SM at T1 (a) Extraoral, profile and frontal (b) Extraoral, ! views and smiling frontal 127 (c) Intraoral 128 Figure 6 – Patient SM with appliances in situ 129 . profile and frontal (b) Extraoral. ! views and smiling frontal 130 .Figure 7 – Patient SM at T2 (a) Extraoral. (c) Intraoral 131 . profile and frontal (b) Extraoral. ! views and smiling frontal 132 .Figure 8 – Patient AD at T1 (a) Extraoral. (c) Intraoral 133 . Figure 9 – Patient AD with appliances in situ 134 . Figure 10 – Patient AD at T2 (a) Extraoral, profile and frontal (b) Extraoral, ! views and smiling frontal 135 (c) Intraoral 136 Figure 11 – Cephalometric landmarks identification and legend Horizontal measurements Point T: The most superior point of the anterior wall of the sella turcica at the junction with tuberculum sellae. SBL: Stable basicranial line (SBL). This line is traced through the most superior point of the anterior wall of the sella turcica at the junction with tuberculum sellae, and it is tangent to lamina cribrosa of the ethmoid Vert T: Line perpendicular to SBL and passing through point T. Vert T – A: Horizontal distance traced from the perpendicular line from Vert T to point A. Vert – B: Horizontal distance traced from the perpendicular line from Vert T to point B. Vert – Pog: Horizontal distance traced from the perpendicular line from Vert T to point Pog. 137 138 . 8: Gonial angle (Go). 2: SNB. 7: SN-OP. 6: SN-MP. 10: UI-PP. 16: NL angle. 12: Interincisal angle(IIA). 4: SN-PP. 9: UI-SN. 17: H angle. 13: Y axis. 11: LI-MP. 5: PP-MP. 3: ANB. 15: SN-Ba. 14: Facial axis.Angular measurements 1: SNA. Figure 12 – Superimpositions patient SM: T1 (Black) and T2 (Red) 139 . Figure 13 – Superimpositions patient AD: T1 (Black) and T2 (Red) 140 . 141 . 0 List of Tables Table I- Summarized cephalometric changes from T1 to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