Orthodontic and orthognathic management of skeletal Class III malocclusion with selfligating brackets
Abstract
This case report presents the orthodontic andorthognathic surgery treatment of a non-growingpatient with class III malocclusion. A 17 year oldfemale patient presented a dental and skeletal classIII malocclusion characterized by mandibulerprognathism and maxillary retrognathism. Selfligating brackets were preferred for pre-surgicalorthodontic management which lasted for 14mounths. Bimaxillary orthognathic surgery wasperformed to correct maxillary-mandibulerdiscrepancy after the pre-surgical orthodontictreatment. Final teeth positions and the occlusionwas improved by post–surgical orthodontictreatment, class I dental and skeletal occlusion anda straight soft tissue profile were achieved withoutextraction. Using self-ligating brackets duringorthodontic and orthognathic surgery treatment ofclass III patients provides more aesthetic and stableresults by improving the treatment efficiency.
References
- Kan H. İskeletsel Sınıf III maloklüzyonlu bireylerde ortodontik tedavinin dentofasiyal yapılar ve üst hava yolları üzerine olan etkilerinin değerlendirilmesi.(Doktora Tezi). Ankara: Hacettepe Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ortodonti Anabilim Dalı; 2012
- Turpin DL. Camouflage might not mean compromise. Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop. 2003;123:241.
- Başçiftçi FA, İleri Z, Yavuzer R. İskeletsel Sınıf III açık kapanışa sahip bir olgunun ortodontik-cerrahi tedavisi. 2012;28:50–53.
- Aksoy AT, Özgentaş E. Sınıf III maloklüzyonlar ve ortognatik cerrahi. Türk Ortod. Derg. 1989;2:152–59.
- Özpar R. İki farklı kendinden bağlanan braket sisteminin mandibular kesici dişlerin seviyelenme safhasındaki etkinliklerinin konvansiyonel braketlerle karşılaştırılarak değerlendirilmesi (Doktora Tezi). İstanbul: Yeditepe Üniversitesi, Sağlık Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ortodonti Anabilim Dalı; 2011.
- Eliades T, Pandis N. Self-Ligation in Orthodontics. Chichester, West Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell, 2009:1-19.
- Harradine NWT. Self-ligating brackets and treatment efficiency. Clin. Orthod. Res. 2001;4:220–27.
- Maijer R, Smith DC. Time savings with self-ligating brackets. J. Clin. Orthod. 1990;24:29–31.
- Eberting JJ, Straja SR, Tuncay OC. Treatment time, outcome, and patient satisfaction comparisons of Damon and conventional brackets. Clin. Orthod. Res. 2001;4:228–34
- Shivapuja PK, Berger J. A comparative study of conventional ligation and self-ligation bracket systems. Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop. 1994;106:472–80.
- Harris M, Hunt N (eds). Fundamentals of orthodontic surgery, 2nd edn. Ortognatik cerrahinin temelleri. (Çeviri: Apaydın A.) İstanbul: İstanbul Medikal Yayıncılık, 2009.
- Harradine NWT. Current Products and Practices Self-ligating brackets : where are we now ? 2003;30:262–73.
- Proffit WR, Fields HW, Sarver DM. Contemporary Orthodontics 4rd ed. St Louis: Mosby; 2007: 268-331.
- Saelens NA, De Smit AA. Therapeutic changes in extraction versus non-extraction orthodontic treatment. Eur. J. Orthod. 1998;20:225–36.
- Carlos A, Ruellas DO, Martins R, Romano FL. Tooth extraction in orthodontics : an evaluation of diagnostic elements. 2010;15:134–57.
- Cetlin NM, Spena R, Vandarsdall RL. Nonexraction treatment. In: Graber TM, Vanarsdall Jr RL, Vig KW (eds). Current Principles and Techniques, 4rd edn. St Louis: Elsevier Mosby; 2005:855-79.
- Nanda RS, Ghosh J. Facial soft tissue harmony and growth in orthodontic treatment. Semin. Orthod. 1995;1:67–81.
- Sergl HG, Lautenbach B. Über den Wert ästhetischer Normen im Rahmen der Profilbeurteilung. Fortschr. Kieferorthop. 1984;45:87–100.
- Turvey TA, Bell RB, Phillips C, Proffit WR. Self-reinforced biodegradable screw fixation compared with titanium screw fixation in mandibular advancement. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. 2006;64:40–6.
- Steiner CC. Cephalometrics for you and me. Am J Orthod 1953;39:729–55.
- Legan HL, Burstone CJ. Soft tissue cephalometric analysis for orthognathic surgery. J. Oral Surg. 1980;38:744–51.
- Bishara SE. Longitudinal cephalometric standards from 5 years of age to adulthood. Am. J. Orthod. 1981;79:35–44.
- McNamara JA. A method of cephalometric evaluation. Am. J. Orthod. 1984;86:449–69.
Abstract
Bu olgu raporunda büyüme ve gelişimi tamamlanmış Sınıf III maloklüzyona sahip bir hastanın ortodontik ve cerrahi tedavisi sunulmuştur. 17 yaşındaki bayan hasta, alt çene ileriliği, üst çene geriliği ile karakterize iskeletsel ve dental Sınıf III maloklüzyon özelliklerini taşımaktaydı. Hastanın 14 ay süren cerrahi öncesi ortodontik tedavisinde kapaklı braketler tercih edilmiştir. Ortodontik tedaviyi takiben alt ve üst çene arasındaki iskeletsel uyumsuzluğunu düzeltmek için her iki çeneye de cerrahi müdahale yapılmıştır. Cerrahi sonrası yapılan ortodontik tedavi ile dişler uygun konumlarına getirilerek oklüzyon düzeltilmiş ve diş çekimi yapılmaksızın iskeletsel ve dişsel Sınıf I ilişki ile ideal bir yumuşak doku profili elde edilmiştir. İskeletsel Sınıf III maloklüzyonların ortodonti ve ortognatik cerrahi kombinasyonuyla tedavisinde kapaklı braketlerin kullanılması ile tedavi verimliliği arttırılarak daha estetik ve stabil sonuçlar sağlanmıştır.
References
- Kan H. İskeletsel Sınıf III maloklüzyonlu bireylerde ortodontik tedavinin dentofasiyal yapılar ve üst hava yolları üzerine olan etkilerinin değerlendirilmesi.(Doktora Tezi). Ankara: Hacettepe Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ortodonti Anabilim Dalı; 2012
- Turpin DL. Camouflage might not mean compromise. Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop. 2003;123:241.
- Başçiftçi FA, İleri Z, Yavuzer R. İskeletsel Sınıf III açık kapanışa sahip bir olgunun ortodontik-cerrahi tedavisi. 2012;28:50–53.
- Aksoy AT, Özgentaş E. Sınıf III maloklüzyonlar ve ortognatik cerrahi. Türk Ortod. Derg. 1989;2:152–59.
- Özpar R. İki farklı kendinden bağlanan braket sisteminin mandibular kesici dişlerin seviyelenme safhasındaki etkinliklerinin konvansiyonel braketlerle karşılaştırılarak değerlendirilmesi (Doktora Tezi). İstanbul: Yeditepe Üniversitesi, Sağlık Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ortodonti Anabilim Dalı; 2011.
- Eliades T, Pandis N. Self-Ligation in Orthodontics. Chichester, West Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell, 2009:1-19.
- Harradine NWT. Self-ligating brackets and treatment efficiency. Clin. Orthod. Res. 2001;4:220–27.
- Maijer R, Smith DC. Time savings with self-ligating brackets. J. Clin. Orthod. 1990;24:29–31.
- Eberting JJ, Straja SR, Tuncay OC. Treatment time, outcome, and patient satisfaction comparisons of Damon and conventional brackets. Clin. Orthod. Res. 2001;4:228–34
- Shivapuja PK, Berger J. A comparative study of conventional ligation and self-ligation bracket systems. Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop. 1994;106:472–80.
- Harris M, Hunt N (eds). Fundamentals of orthodontic surgery, 2nd edn. Ortognatik cerrahinin temelleri. (Çeviri: Apaydın A.) İstanbul: İstanbul Medikal Yayıncılık, 2009.
- Harradine NWT. Current Products and Practices Self-ligating brackets : where are we now ? 2003;30:262–73.
- Proffit WR, Fields HW, Sarver DM. Contemporary Orthodontics 4rd ed. St Louis: Mosby; 2007: 268-331.
- Saelens NA, De Smit AA. Therapeutic changes in extraction versus non-extraction orthodontic treatment. Eur. J. Orthod. 1998;20:225–36.
- Carlos A, Ruellas DO, Martins R, Romano FL. Tooth extraction in orthodontics : an evaluation of diagnostic elements. 2010;15:134–57.
- Cetlin NM, Spena R, Vandarsdall RL. Nonexraction treatment. In: Graber TM, Vanarsdall Jr RL, Vig KW (eds). Current Principles and Techniques, 4rd edn. St Louis: Elsevier Mosby; 2005:855-79.
- Nanda RS, Ghosh J. Facial soft tissue harmony and growth in orthodontic treatment. Semin. Orthod. 1995;1:67–81.
- Sergl HG, Lautenbach B. Über den Wert ästhetischer Normen im Rahmen der Profilbeurteilung. Fortschr. Kieferorthop. 1984;45:87–100.
- Turvey TA, Bell RB, Phillips C, Proffit WR. Self-reinforced biodegradable screw fixation compared with titanium screw fixation in mandibular advancement. J. Oral Maxillofac. Surg. 2006;64:40–6.
- Steiner CC. Cephalometrics for you and me. Am J Orthod 1953;39:729–55.
- Legan HL, Burstone CJ. Soft tissue cephalometric analysis for orthognathic surgery. J. Oral Surg. 1980;38:744–51.
- Bishara SE. Longitudinal cephalometric standards from 5 years of age to adulthood. Am. J. Orthod. 1981;79:35–44.
- McNamara JA. A method of cephalometric evaluation. Am. J. Orthod. 1984;86:449–69.
Details
| Primary Language | Turkish |
|---|---|
| Subjects | Health Care Administration |
| Journal Section | Case Reports |
| Authors | |
| Publication Date | April 3, 2014 |
| Submission Date | April 3, 2014 |
| Published in Issue | Year 2014Volume: 17 Issue: 2 |
Cumhuriyet Dental Journal (Cumhuriyet Dent J, CDJ) is the official publication of Cumhuriyet University Faculty of Dentistry. CDJ is an international journal dedicated to the latest advancement of dentistry. The aim of this journal is to provide a platform for scientists and academicians all over the world to promote, share, and discuss various new issues and developments in different areas of dentistry. First issue of the Journal of Cumhuriyet University Faculty of Dentistry was published in 1998. In 2010, journal's name was changed as Cumhuriyet Dental Journal. Journal’s publication language is English.
CDJ accepts articles in English. Submitting a paper to CDJ is free of charges. In addition, CDJ has not have article processing charges.
Frequency: Four times a year (March, June, September, and December)
IMPORTANT NOTICE
All users of Cumhuriyet Dental Journal should visit to their user's home page through the "https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/user" " or "https://dergipark.org.tr/en/user" links to update their incomplete information shown in blue or yellow warnings and update their e-mail addresses and information to the DergiPark system. Otherwise, the e-mails from the journal will not be seen or fall into the SPAM folder. Please fill in all missing part in the relevant field.
Please visit journal's AUTHOR GUIDELINE to see revised policy and submission rules to be held since 2020.