Two appliances for anterior crossbite correction in deciduous dentition: a comparison of permanent incisor germ displacement based on cephalometric measurement

doi:10.12307/2021.155

Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research ›› 2021, Vol. 25 ›› Issue (29): 4593-4599.doi: 10.12307/2021.155

Two appliances for anterior crossbite correction in deciduous dentition: a comparison of permanent incisor germ displacement based on cephalometric measurement

Liu Yafei1, Zuo Yanping1, Liu Xin2, Zhao Lixia1, Wei Jing1

1Department of Orthodontics, the First Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang 050031, Hebei Province, China; 2Department of Stomatology, the Fourth Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang 050017, Hebei Province, China

Received:2020-11-09 Revised:2020-11-12 Accepted:2020-12-24 Online:2021-10-18 Published:2021-06-01
Contact: Zuo Yanping, MD, Professor, Department of Orthodontics, the First Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang 050031, Hebei Province, China
About author:Liu Yafei, Master, Associate chief physician, Department of Orthodontics, the First Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang 050031, Hebei Province, China
Supported by:
the Scientific Research Fund of Hebei Provincial Health Department, No. 20100050 (to LYF)

Abstract

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: Currently, it is still unclear on the mechanism by which anterior crossbite correction in deciduous dentition exerts a role in permanent incisor germ.

OBJECTIVE: To compare and analyze the changes in the position and angle of the maxillary permanent incisor germ after the modified block appliance and the protraction appliance are used to correct anterior crossbite in the deciduous dentition.

METHODS: Thirty-six patients with deciduous anterior crossbite admitted from 2008 to 2018 were treated with modified block appliance or protraction appliance. The positions and angles of maxillary permanent incisor germs before and after orthodontic treatment were measured and analyzed. The implementation of the study protocol complied with the relevant ethical requirements of the First Hospital of Hebei Medical University, and guardians of these included children were fully informed of the trial process.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: Preoperatively, the inclination of the maxillary permanent incisor germs G1-SN and G1-NA were smaller in the modified block appliance group than in the protraction appliance group (both P < 0.05) The axial distance of the incisal edge and root tip of maxillary permanent incisor germs in X-axis and Y-axis was increased obviously in the two groups (P < 0.05 or P < 0.01), especially in the protraction appliance group (P < 0.05 or P < 0.01 or P < 0.001). These findings indicate that both modified block appliance and protraction appliance can make maxillary permanent incisor germs move forward and downward, and the displacement is more evident after orthodontic treatment with protraction appliance. Compared with the modified block appliance, the protraction appliance has a more obvious effect on the forward and downward movement of maxillary permanent incisor germs, and this movement mode is similar to the whole movement.

Key words: deciduous anterior crossbite, permanent incisor germs, modified block appliance, protraction appliance, class III malocclusion

CLC Number:

Liu Yafei, Zuo Yanping, Liu Xin, Zhao Lixia, Wei Jing. Two appliances for anterior crossbite correction in deciduous dentition: a comparison of permanent incisor germ displacement based on cephalometric measurement[J]. Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research, 2021, 25(29): 4593-4599.

Figures/Tables 6

References

[1] 王嘉艺,龚爱秀.舌栅联合牙合垫式矫治器矫治乳牙期前牙反牙合的疗效分析[J].南京医科大学学报(自然科学版),2020,40(3):421-425.
[2] JANG SJ, CHOI DS, JANG I, et al. Quantitative comparison of incisal tooth wear in patients receiving one-phase or two-phase treatment for skeletal Class III malocclusion with anterior crossbite. Angle Orthod. 2018;88(2):151-156.
[3] MIAMOTO CB, MARQUES LS, ABREU LG, et al. Comparison of two early treatment protocols for anterior dental crossbite in the mixed dentition: A randomized trial. Angle Orthod. 2018;88(2):144-150.
[4] SEIRYU M, IDA H, MAYAMA A, et al. A comparative assessment of orthodontic treatment outcomes of mild skeletal Class III malocclusion between facemask and facemask in combination with a miniscrew for anchorage in growing patients: A single-center, prospective randomized controlled trial. Angle Orthod. 2020;90(1):3-12.
[5] KANG TJ,EO SH,CHO HJ,et al.A sparse principal component analysis of Class III malocclusions. Angle Orthod. 2019;89(5):768-774.
[6] BACCETTI T, FRANCHI L, JAMES A, et al. Growth in the untreated class III subject. Semin Orthod. 2007;13:130-142.
[7] 华咏梅,石四箴.乳牙反牙合的调查与分析[J].口腔医学,2000,20(1): 43-44.
[8] DIMBERGA L, LENNARTSSONB B, ARNRUPC K, et al. Prevalence and change of malocclusions from primary to early permanent dentition: A longitudinal study. Angle Orthod. 2015;85(5):728-734.
[9] ORMISTON JP, HUANG GJ, LITTLE RM, et al. Retrospective analysis of long-term stable and unstable orthodontic treatment outcomes. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2005;128(5):568 -574.
[10] 石慧俊,曾祥龙,傅民魁.前牙反牙合矫治后的复发因素探讨[J].临床口腔医学杂志,1994,10(3):137-140.
[11] 左艳萍,刘亚非,刘听,等.应用微型扩弓器矫治乳牙反牙合的临床效果观察[J].中华口腔正畸学杂志,2016,23(2):85-88.
[12] 刘亚非,牛小雷,左艳萍. 改良牙合垫舌簧矫治器矫治乳牙反牙合的临床体会[J].现代口腔医学杂志,2008,22(4):344.
[13] BUSCHANG PH, GANDINI LG. Mandibular skeletal growth and modeling between 10 and 15 years of age. Eur J Orthod. 2002;24(1):69-79.
[14] BUSCHANG P. Santos-pinto. Condylar growth and glenoid fossa displacement during childhood and adolescence. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1998;113(4):437-442.
[15] 曾祥龙.乳前牙反牙合的计算机X线头影测量[J].口腔医学,1986, 6(1):20-23.
[16] TOLLARO I, BACCETTI T, BASSARELLI V, et al. Class III malocclusion in the deciduous dentition: a morphological and correlation study. Eur J Orthod. 1994;16(5):401-408.
[17] REYES BC, BACCETTI T, MCNAMARA JA. An Estimate of Craniofacial Growth in Class III Malocclu- sion.Angle Orthod. 2006;76(4):577-584.
[18] KWON JH, KIM JY, PARK K, et al. Cephalometric Characteristics of Korean Children with Class III Malocclusion in the Deciduous Dentition. Angle Orthod. 2010;80(1):86-90.
[19] BACCETTI T, REYES BC, MCNAMARA JA. Gender differences in Class III malocclusion. Angle Orthod. 2005;75(4):510-520.
[20] MIYAJIMA K, MCNAMARA JA, SANA M, et al. An estimation of craniofacial growth in the untreated Class III female with anterior crossbite. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1997;112(4):425-434.
[21] 谷岩.生长发育与前牙反牙合的正畸治疗[J].中华口腔正畸学杂志, 2009(1):54-56.
[22] TOLLARO I, BACCETTI T,FRANCHI L.Craniofacial changes induced by early functional treatment of Class III malocclusion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1996;109(3):310-318.
[23] 冷军,段银钟,金军.矫治乳牙反牙合后上颌骨乳切牙恒切牙胚位置变化的研究[J].实用口腔医学杂志,1997,13(4):283-285.
[24] 孙嫱,刘英群,吕晶,等.矫治乳前牙反牙合对恒牙胚及颌骨位置变化影响的研究[J].口腔医学,2009;29(6):288-290.
[25] 蒋琳,刘进.功能调节器矫治乳前牙反牙合对恒切颌影响的头影测量研究[J].临床口腔医学杂志,2000,16(6):160-162.
[26] 金作林,林珠,李红.正畸移动狗乳磨牙对恒牙胚的影响[J].中华口腔医学杂志,2003,38(6):466.
[27] 李菲菲,丁寅,夏春鹏,等.犬下颌骨牵张成骨术后恒牙胚变化的实验研究[J].牙体牙髓牙周病学杂志,2003,13(4):186-188.
[28] 张娜,杨富生,王丽芳.TRAF6在犬乳恒牙替换阶段的表达[J].临床口腔医学杂志,2007,23(4):214-216.

Two appliances for anterior crossbite correction in deciduous dentition: a comparison of permanent incisor germ displacement based on cephalometric measurement

PDF

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 6

References

Related Articles 1

Recommended Articles

Metrics

Comments