MAXILLARY TRACTION WITH SKELETAL ANCHORAGE USING TITANIUM MINIPLATES AS A SUBSTITUTE FOR FACIAL MASK IN CLASS III TREATMENT - AN INTEGRATIVE LITERATURE REVIEW
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.47820/recima21.v4i10.4114Keywords:
Bone Anchorage. Class III. Face mask. Miniplates. Maxillary traction. Treatment.Abstract
Until the advent of absolute anchorage with titanium plates, the interceptive treatment of skeletal Class III had ideally been conducted through maxillary traction using facial masks, which led to some resistance from specialists towards alternative methods. Therefore, the objective of this study was to conduct a literature review comparing the two treatment approaches, pointing out the advantages and disadvantages of each modality and considering the possibility of using skeletal anchorage devices with titanium miniplates to definitively replace facial mask therapy in Class III patients. The research was carried out using the search platforms PubMed/MEDLINE and SciELO under the eligibility criteria of the PRISMA-ScR strategy for qualitative analysis. Absolute anchorage does not use teeth for support, minimizing dentoalveolar compensations while promoting remarkable maxillary advancement. Therefore, it can be concluded that the possibility of achieving the necessary correction without extraoral devices is encouraging, justifying the search and organization of studies that demonstrate the acceptance and the real capacity to obtain good results with the new therapeutic modality.
Downloads
References
ALMUZIAN, M. et al. The effectiveness of alternating rapid maxillary expansion and constriction combined with maxillary protraction in the treatment of patients with a class III malocclusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Orthod, v. 45, p. 250–259, 2018.
ANGLE, E.H. Treatment of malocclusion of the teeth and fractures of the maxillae, Angle’s system. ed. Philadelphia: SS White Dental Manufacturing, 6th, California, 1900. p.5-15.
ARAÚJO, E. A.; ARAÚJO, C. V. de. Abordagem clínica não-cirúrgica no tratamento da má oclusão de Classe III. R Dental Press Ortodon Ortop Facial 1, Maringá, v. 13, n. 6, p. 128-157, nov. 2008.
AYÇA, A; TOYGAR, T. U; EYAS, A. Avaliação da protração maxilar e terapia com aparelhos fixos em pacientes Classe III, European Journal of Orthodontics , v. 28, n. 4, p. 383-392, Agosto. 2006. https://doi.org /10.1093/ejo/cjl008.
BACCETTI, T; FRANCHI, L; MCNAMARA, J. A. Growth in the Untreated Class III Subject. Seminars In Orthodontics, [S.L.], v. 13, n. 3, p. 130-142, set. 2007. Elsevier BV. http://dx.doi.org/10.1053/j.sodo.2007.05.006.
BUYUKÇAVUS, M. H. Alternat Rapid Maxillary Expansionand Constriction (Alt-RAMEC) protocol: a Comprehensive Literature Review. Turkish Journal of Orthodontics, v. 32, n. 1, p. 47-51, 2019.
CEVIDANES, L. et al; Comparison of two protocols for maxillary protraction: bone anchors versus face mask with rapid maxillary expansion. The Angle Orthodontist, [S.L.], v. 80, n. 5, p. 799-806, set. 2010. The Angle Orthodontist (EH Angle Education & Research Foundation). http://dx.doi.org/10.2319/111709-651.1.
CLERCK, H. J. de; et al. Orthopedic Traction of the Maxilla With Miniplates: a new perspective for treatment of midface deficiency. Journal Of Oral And Maxillofacial Surgery, [S.L.], v. 67, n. 10, p. 2123-2129, out. 2009. Elsevier BV. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2009.03.007.
CORDASCO, G. et al. Efficacy of orthopedic treatment with protraction facemask on skeletal Class III malocclusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Orthod Craniofac Res, v. 17, p. 133–143, 2014.
CORNELIS, M. A. et al. Modified Miniplates for Temporary Skeletal Anchorage in Orthodontics: placement and removal surgeries. Journal Of Oral And Maxillofacial Surgery, [S.L.], v. 66, n. 7, p. 1439-1445, jul. 2008. Elsevier BV. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2008.01.037.
ELNAGAR, M. H. et al. Comparative evaluation of 2 skeletally anchored maxillary protraction protocols. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, v. 150, p. 751–762, 2016.
FACO, R. et al. Bone-anchored maxillary protraction in unilateral cleft lip and palate: a cephalometric appraisal. European Journal Of Orthodontics, [S.L.], v. 41, n. 5, p. 537-543, 13 mar. 2019. Oxford University Press (OUP). http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjz005.
FAKHARIAN, M.; BARDIDEH, E.; ABTAHI, M. Skeletal Class III malocclusion treatment using mandibular and maxillary skeletal anchorage and intermaxillary elastics: a case report. Dental Press J Orthod, v. 24, n. 5, p. 52-59, set- out. 2019.
FOERSH, M. et al. Effectiveness of maxillary protraction using facemask with or without maxillary expansion: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Oral Investig, v. 19, p. 1181–1192, 2015.
GE, Y. S. et al. Dentofacial effects of two facemask therapies for maxillary protraction. Angle Orthod, v. 82, p. 1083–1091, 2012.
GRABER, L.W.; VANARSDALL JR, R. L.; VIG, K.W.L. Ortodontia: Princípios e Técnicas Atuais. 5. ed. Rio Janeiro: Mosby Elsevier, 2012.
HONG, Q. N. (2018). Revision of the Mixed MethodsAppraisal Tool (MMAT): A mixed methods study (Doctoral dissertation). Department of Family Medicine,McGill University, Montréal
LEE, N. K; YANG, I. H; BAEK, S. H. The short-term treatment effects of face mask therapy in Class III patients based on the anchorage device. The Angle Orthodontist, [S.L.], v. 82, n. 5, p. 846-852, set. 2012. http://dx.doi.org/10.2319/090811-584.1.
LUZ, N. O. et al. Tratamento de classe III com expansão rápida da maxila associada à máscara facial: relato de caso clínico. Jof - Jornal de Odontologia da Facit. Araguaína, To, p. 24-31. 29 jun. 2014.
MANDALL, N. et al. Early class III protraction facemask treatment reduces the need for orthognathic surgery: a multi-centre, two-arm parallel randomized, controlled trial. J Orthod, v. 43, p. 164–175, 2016.
NGUYEN, T. et al. Three-dimensional assessment of maxillary changes associated with bone anchored maxillary protraction. American Journal Of Orthodontics And Dentofacial Orthopedics, [S.L.], v. 140, n. 6, p. 790-798, dez. 2011. Elsevier BV. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2011.04.025.
NOWRIN, S. A. et al. Class III Malocclusion: missense mutations in dusp6 gene. Pesquisa Brasileira em Odontopediatria e Clínica Integrada, [S.L.], v. 19, n. 1, p. 1-9, 2019. http://dx.doi.org/10.4034/pboci.2019.191.65.
PAGE, M.J. et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 2021;372:n71.10.1136/bmj.n71
PERRONE, A. P. R; MUCHA, NELSON, J. O tratamento da Classe III: revisão sistemática - parte i. magnitude, direção e duração das forças na protração maxilar. Revista Dental Press de Ortodontia e Ortopedia Facial, [S.L.], v. 14, n. 5, p. 109-117, out. 2009. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/s1415-54192009000500015.
PROFFIT, W. R.; FIELDS, H. W.; SARVER, D. M. Ortodontia Contemporânea. 5. ed. Rio de Janeiro: Mosby Elsevier, 2012.
TOFFOL, L. de; et al. Orthopedic Treatment Outcomes in Class III Malocclusion. The Angle Orthodontist, [S.L.], v. 78, n. 3, p. 561-573, 1 maio 2008. http://dx.doi.org/10.2319/030207-108.1.
VIEIRA, B. B. et al. Surgical-orthodontic treatment of Class III malocclusion with agenesis of lateral incisor and unerupted canine. Dental Press Journal Of Orthodontics, [S.L.], v. 18, n. 3, p. 94-100, jun. 2013. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/s2176-94512013000300015.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
License
Copyright (c) 2023 RECIMA21 - Revista Científica Multidisciplinar - ISSN 2675-6218
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Os direitos autorais dos artigos/resenhas/TCCs publicados pertecem à revista RECIMA21, e seguem o padrão Creative Commons (CC BY 4.0), permitindo a cópia ou reprodução, desde que cite a fonte e respeite os direitos dos autores e contenham menção aos mesmos nos créditos. Toda e qualquer obra publicada na revista, seu conteúdo é de responsabilidade dos autores, cabendo a RECIMA21 apenas ser o veículo de divulgação, seguindo os padrões nacionais e internacionais de publicação.