Facemask Effects in Two Types of Intraoral Appliances : Bonded Expander vs. Hyrax
作者： Chanyoung Park , Kitae Park
DOI: 10.5933/JKAPD.2015.42.1.45
关键词: Radiography 、 Maxillary protraction 、 Dentistry 、 Medicine 、 Significant difference 、 Sagittal plane 、 Class iii malocclusion 、 Orthodontics 、 After treatment 、 Hyrax
摘要: The purpose of this study was to compare and evaluate facemask effects when two types intraoral appliances were used for maxillary protraction patients with class III malocclusion. Eighteen malocclusion treated a an average 12 months. Two used: nine bonded expander (Group 1), Hyrax 2). Cephalometric radiographs taken before after treatment. traced, analyzed, the results such as sagittal, vertical soft-tissue changes compared between groups. amount anchorage loss also measured difference All showed significant sagittal skeletal treatment, there no statistically When evaluated, differences shown two. Facemask or is similarly effective method treatment in patients.
sci-hub.st 参考文章(21)
William L Brudon, James A Jr McNamara, Vincent G Kokich, Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics ,(2001)
Kyu-Ho Yang, Sug-Eui Kim, CASE REPORTS ON TREATMENT OF SKELETAL CLASS III MALOCCLUSION WITH RME AND FACEMASK THE JOURNAL OF THE KOREAN ACADEMY OF PEDTATRIC DENTISTRY. ,vol. 25, pp. 604- 612 ,(1998)
Xiaoxia Feng, Jianhua Li, Yu Li, Zhihe Zhao, Sen Zhao, Jue Wang, Effectiveness of TAD-anchored maxillary protraction in late mixed dentition. Angle Orthodontist. ,vol. 82, pp. 1107- 1114 ,(2012) , 10.2319/111411-705.1
George J. Cisneros, George J. Cisneros, Steven Asanza, Lewis G. Nieberg, Comparison of Hyrax and bonded expansion appliances. Angle Orthodontist. ,vol. 67, pp. 15- 22 ,(1997) , 10.1043/0003-3219(1997)067<0015:COHABE>2.3.CO;2
Pawan Gautam, Ashima Valiathan, Raviraj Adhikari, Maxillary protraction with and without maxillary expansion: A finite element analysis of sutural stresses American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. ,vol. 136, pp. 361- 366 ,(2009) , 10.1016/J.AJODO.2008.02.021
Jeong-Hwan Kim, Marlos A.G. Viana, Tom M. Graber, Frank F. Omerza, Ellen A. BeGole, The effectiveness of protraction face mask therapy: A meta-analysis ☆ ☆☆ ★ American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. ,vol. 115, pp. 675- 685 ,(1999) , 10.1016/S0889-5406(99)70294-5
B Solano-Mendoza, A Iglesias-Linares, RM Yañez-Vico, A Mendoza-Mendoza, JJ Alió-Sanz, E Solano-Reina, Maxillary protraction at early ages. The revolution of new bone anchorage appliances. Journal of Clinical Pediatric Dentistry. ,vol. 37, pp. 219- 229 ,(2012) , 10.17796/JCPD.37.2.Q0K770403V443053
Bong-Kuen Cha, Dong-Soon Choi, Peter Ngan, Paul-Georg Jost-Brinkmann, Soung-Min Kim, In-san Jang, Maxillary protraction with miniplates providing skeletal anchorage in a growing Class III patient American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. ,vol. 139, pp. 99- 112 ,(2011) , 10.1016/J.AJODO.2009.06.025
Roberta Lione, Lorenzo Franchi, Paola Cozza, Does rapid maxillary expansion induce adverse effects in growing subjects Angle Orthodontist. ,vol. 83, pp. 172- 182 ,(2013) , 10.2319/041012-300.1
Ib Leth Nielsen, Maxillary superimposition: A comparison of three methods for cephalometric evaluation of growth and treatment change American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics. ,vol. 95, pp. 422- 431 ,(1989) , 10.1016/0889-5406(89)90304-1