Hugo De Clerck

Orthopedic traction of the maxilla with miniplates: a new perspective for treatment of midface deficiency.

Class III malocclusion is a consequence of maxillary deficiency and/or mandibular prognathism, often resulting in an anterior crossbite and a concave profile.1 Young patients with maxillary hypoplasia are usually treated with a facemask: heavy anterior traction is applied on the maxilla to stimulate its growth and to restrain or redirect mandibular growth. Forward and downward movement of the maxilla as well as favorable changes in the amount and direction of mandibular growth has been reported.2–5 However, these forces generally result in a posterior rotation of the mandible and an increased vertical dimension of the face.2,4,6 Moreover, dental compensations (proclination of the upper incisors and uprighting of the lower incisors) are observed as a consequence of the application of forces on the teeth,4,7 and facemask wear is usually limited to 14 hours per day at best. Titanium miniplates used for anchorage now offer the possibility to apply pure bone-borne orthopedic forces between the maxilla and the mandible for 24 hours per day, avoiding any dentoalveolar compensations.

Dentofacial effects of bone-anchored maxillary protraction: A controlled study of consecutively treated Class III patients

INTRODUCTION In this cephalometric investigation, we analyzed the treatment effects of bone-anchored maxillary protraction (BAMP) with miniplates in the maxilla and mandible connected by Class III elastics in patients with Class III malocclusion. METHODS The treated sample consisted of 21 Class III patients consecutively treated with the BAMP protocol before the pubertal growth spurt (mean age, 11.10 ± 1.8 years) and reevaluated after BAMP therapy, about 1 year later. The treated group was compared with a matched control group of 18 untreated Class III subjects. Significant differences between the treated and control groups were assessed with independent-sample t tests (P <0.05). RESULTS Sagittal measurements of the maxilla showed highly significant improvements during active treatment (about 4 mm more than the untreated controls), with significant protraction effects at orbitale and pterygomaxillare. Significant improvements of overjet and molar relationship were recorded, as well as in the mandibular skeletal measures at Point B and pogonion. Vertical skeletal changes and modifications in incisor inclination were negligible, except for a significant proclination of the mandibular incisors in the treated group. Significant soft-tissue changes reflected the underlying skeletal modifications. CONCLUSIONS Compared with growth of the untreated Class III subjects, the BAMP protocol induced an average increment on skeletal and soft-tissue advancement of maxillary structures of about 4 mm, and favorable mandibular changes exceeded 2 mm.

Comparison of two protocols for maxillary protraction: Bone anchors versus face mask with rapid maxillary expansion

OBJECTIVE To test the hypothesis that there is no difference in the active treatment effects for maxillary advancement induced by bone-anchored maxillary protraction (BAMP) and the active treatment effects for face mask in association with rapid maxillary expansion (RME/FM). MATERIALS AND METHODS This is a study on consecutively treated patients. The changes in dentoskeletal cephalometric variables from start of treatment (T1) to end of active treatment (T2) with an average T1-T2 interval of about 1 year were contrasted in a BAMP sample of 21 subjects with a RME/FM sample of 34 patients. All subjects were prepubertal at T1. Statistical comparison was performed with t-tests for independent samples. RESULTS The BAMP protocol produced significantly larger maxillary advancement than the RME/FM therapy (with a difference of 2 mm to 3 mm). Mandibular sagittal changes were similar, while vertical changes were better controlled with BAMP. The sagittal intermaxillary relationships improved 2.5 mm more in the BAMP patients. Additional favorable outcomes of BAMP treatment were the lack of clockwise rotation of the mandible as well as a lack of retroclination of the lower incisors. CONCLUSIONS The hypothesis is rejected. The BAMP protocol produced significantly larger maxillary advancement than the RME/FM therapy.

Three-dimensional analysis of maxillary protraction with intermaxillary elastics to miniplates.

INTRODUCTION Early Class III treatment with reverse-pull headgear generally results in maxillary skeletal protraction but is frequently also accompanied by unfavorable dentoalveolar effects. An alternative treatment with intermaxillary elastics from a temporary anchorage device might permit equivalent favorable skeletal changes without the unwanted dentoalveolar effects. METHODS Six consecutive patients (3 boys, 3 girls; ages, 10-13 years 3 months) with Class III occlusion and maxillary deficiency were treated by using intermaxillary elastics to titanium miniplates. Cone-beam computed tomography scans taken before and after treatment were used to create 3-dimensional volumetric models that were superimposed on nongrowing structures in the anterior cranial base to determine anatomic changes during treatment. RESULTS The effect of the intermaxillary elastic forces was throughout the nasomaxillary structures. All 6 patients showed improvements in the skeletal relationship, primarily through maxillary advancement with little effect on the dentoalveolar units or change in mandibular position. CONCLUSIONS The use of intermaxillary forces applied to temporary anchorage devices appears to be a promising treatment method.

Three-dimensional assessment of maxillary changes associated with bone anchored maxillary protraction

INTRODUCTION Bone-anchored maxillary protraction has been shown to be an effective treatment modality for the correction of Class III malocclusions. The purpose of this study was to evaluate 3-dimensional changes in the maxilla, the surrounding hard and soft tissues, and the circummaxillary sutures after bone-anchored maxillary protraction treatment. METHODS Twenty-five consecutive skeletal Class III patients between the ages of 9 and 13 years (mean, 11.10 ± 1.1 years) were treated with Class III intermaxillary elastics and bilateral miniplates (2 in the infrazygomatic crests of the maxilla and 2 in the anterior mandible). Cone-beam computed tomographs were taken before initial loading and 1 year out. Three-dimensional models were generated from the tomographs, registered on the anterior cranial base, superimposed, and analyzed by using color maps. RESULTS The maxilla showed a mean forward displacement of 3.7 mm, and the zygomas and the maxillary incisors came forward 3.7 and 4.3 mm, respectively. CONCLUSIONS This treatment approach produced significant orthopedic changes in the maxilla and the zygomas in growing Class III patients.

Three-dimensional assessment of mandibular and glenoid fossa changes after bone-anchored Class III intermaxillary traction

INTRODUCTION Conventional treatment for young Class III patients involves extraoral devices designed to either protract the maxilla or restrain mandibular growth. The use of skeletal anchorage offers a promising alternative to obtain orthopedic results with fewer dental compensations. Our aim was to evaluate 3-dimensional changes in the mandibles and the glenoid fossae of Class III patients treated with bone-anchored maxillary protraction. METHODS Twenty-five consecutive skeletal Class III patients between the ages of 9 and 13 years (mean age, 11.10 ± 1.1 year) were treated with Class III intermaxillary elastics and bilateral miniplates (2 in the infrazygomatic crests of the maxilla and 2 in the anterior mandible). The patients had cone-beam computed tomography images taken before initial loading and at the end of active treatment. Three-dimensional models were generated from these images, registered on the anterior cranial base, and analyzed by using color maps. RESULTS Posterior displacement of the mandible at the end of treatment was observed in all subjects (posterior ramus: mean, 2.74 ± 1.36 mm; condyles: mean, 2.07 ± 1.16 mm; chin: mean, -0.13 ± 2.89 mm). Remodeling of the glenoid fossa at the anterior eminence (mean, 1.38 ± 1.03 mm) and bone resorption at the posterior wall (mean, -1.34 ± 0.6 mm) were observed in most patients. CONCLUSIONS This new treatment approach offers a promising alternative to restrain mandibular growth for Class III patients with a component of mandibular prognathism or to compensate for maxillary deficiency in patients with hypoplasia of the midface. Future studies with long-term follow-up and comparisons with facemask and chincup therapies are needed to better understand the treatment effects.

Three-dimensional analysis of maxillary changes associated with facemask and rapid maxillary expansion compared with bone anchored maxillary protraction

INTRODUCTION Our objectives in this study were to evaluate in 3 dimensions the growth and treatment effects on the midface and the maxillary dentition produced by facemask therapy in association with rapid maxillary expansion (RME/FM) compared with bone-anchored maxillary protraction (BAMP). METHODS Forty-six patients with Class III malocclusion were treated with either RME/FM (n = 21) or BAMP (n = 25). Three-dimensional models generated from cone-beam computed tomographic scans, taken before and after approximately 1 year of treatment, were registered on the anterior cranial base and measured using color-coded maps and semitransparent overlays. RESULTS The skeletal changes in the maxilla and the right and left zygomas were on average 2.6 mm in the RME/FM group and 3.7 mm in the BAMP group; these were different statistically. Seven RME/FM patients and 4 BAMP patients had a predominantly vertical displacement of the maxilla. The dental changes at the maxillary incisors were on average 3.2 mm in the RME/FM group and 4.3 mm in the BAMP group. Ten RME/FM patients had greater dental compensations than skeletal changes. CONCLUSIONS This 3-dimensional study shows that orthopedic changes can be obtained with both RME/FM and BAMP treatments, with protraction of the maxilla and the zygomas. Approximately half of the RME/FM patients had greater dental than skeletal changes, and a third of the RME/FM compared with 17% of the BAMP patients had a predominantly vertical maxillary displacement.

Use of shape correspondence analysis to quantify skeletal changes associated with bone-anchored Class III correction

OBJECTIVE To evaluate the three-dimensional (3D) skeletal changes in the mandibles of Class III patients treated with bone-anchored maxillary protraction using shape correspondence analysis. MATERIAL AND METHOD Twenty-five consecutive patients with skeletal Class III who were between the ages of 9 and 13 years (mean age, 11.10 ± 1.1 years) were treated using Class III intermaxillary elastics and bilateral miniplates (two in the infrazygomatic crests of the maxilla and two in the anterior mandible). Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) was performed for each patient before initial loading (T1) and at 1 year out (T2). From the CBCT scans, 3D models were generated, registered on the anterior cranial base, and analyzed using 3D linear distances and vectors between corresponding point-based surfaces. RESULTS Bone-anchored traction produced anteroposterior and vertical skeletal changes in the mandible. The novel application of Shape correspondence analysis showed vectors of mean (± standard deviation) distal displacement of the posterior ramus of 3.6 ± 1.4 mm, while the chin displaced backward by 0.5 ± 3.92 mm. The lower border of the mandible at the menton region was displaced downward by 2.6 ± 1.2 mm, and the lower border at the gonial region moved downward by 3.6 ± 1.4 mm. There was a downward and backward displacement around the gonial region with a mean closure of the gonial angle by 2.1°. The condyles were displaced distally by a mean of 2.6 ± 1.5 mm, and there were three distinct patterns for displacement: 44% backward, 40% backward and downward, and 16% backward and upward. CONCLUSION This treatment approach induces favorable control of the mandibular growth pattern and can be used to treat patients with components of mandibular prognathism.

Growth modification of the face: A current perspective with emphasis on Class III treatment

A summary of the current status of modification of jaw growth indicates the following. 1. Transverse expansion of the maxilla is easy before adolescence, requires heavy forces to create microfractures during adolescence, and can be accomplished only with partial or complete surgical osteotomy after adolescence. Transverse expansion of the mandible or constriction of either jaw requires surgery. 2. Acceleration of mandibular growth in preadolescent or adolescent patients can be achieved, but slower than normal growth afterward reduces or eliminates a long-term increase in size of the mandible. Restraint of maxillary growth occurs with all types of appliances to correct skeletal Class II problems. For short-face Class II patients, increasing the face height during preadolescent or adolescent orthodontic treatment is possible, but it may make the Class II problem worse unless favorable anteroposterior growth occurs. For those with a long face, controlling excessive vertical growth during adolescence is rarely successful. 3. Attempts to restrain mandibular growth in Class III patients with external forces largely result in downward and backward rotation of the mandible. Moving the maxilla forward with external force is possible before adolescence; moving it forward and simultaneously restricting forward mandibular growth without rotating the jaw is possible during adolescence with intermaxillary traction to bone anchors. The amount of skeletal change with this therapy often extends to the midface, and the short-term effects on both jaws are greater than with previous approaches, but individual variations in the amount of maxillary vs mandibular response occur, and it still is not possible to accurately predict the outcome for a patient. For all types of growth modification, 3-dimensional imaging to distinguish skeletal changes and better biomarkers or genetic identification of patient types to indicate likely treatment responses are needed.

Effect of Class III bone anchor treatment on airway

OBJECTIVES To compare airway volumes and minimum cross-section area changes of Class III patients treated with bone-anchored maxillary protraction (BAMP) versus untreated Class III controls. MATERIALS AND METHODS Twenty-eight consecutive skeletal Class III patients between the ages of 10 and 14 years (mean age, 11.9 years) were treated using Class III intermaxillary elastics and bilateral miniplates (two in the infra-zygomatic crests of the maxilla and two in the anterior mandible). The subjects had cone beam computed tomographs (CBCTs) taken before initial loading (T1) and 1 year out (T2). Twenty-eight untreated Class III patients (mean age, 12.4 years) had CBCTs taken and cephalograms generated. The airway volumes and minimum cross-sectional area measurements were performed using Dolphin Imaging 11.7 3D software. The superior border of the airway was defined by a plane that passes through the posterior nasal spine and basion, while the inferior border included the base of the epiglottis to the lower border of C3. RESULTS From T1 to T2, airway volume from BAMP-treated subjects showed a statistically significant increase (1499.64 mm(3)). The area in the most constricted section of the airway (choke point) increased slightly (15.44 mm(2)). The airway volume of BAMP patients at T2 was 14136.61 mm(3), compared with 14432.98 mm(3) in untreated Class III subjects. Intraexaminer correlation coefficients values and 95% confidence interval values were all greater than .90, showing a high degree of reliability of the measurements. CONCLUSION BAMP treatment did not hinder the development of the oropharynx.