Yüksek açılı sınıf II vakaların manyetik fonksiyonel apareylerle tedavisi

Abstract

Bu çalışmanın amacı, farklı şekilde tasarlanmış manyetik fonksiyonel apareylerin ön açıkkapanış veya overbite değerlerine göre, yüksek açılıiskeletsel Sınıf II malokluzyona sahip hastalarındentofasiyal yapılarına etkilerini karşılaştırmalıolarak incelemektir

Treatment of Class II High Angle Cases by Using Magnetic Functional Appliances

Abstract

The aim of this study was to evaluate and tocompare the dentofacial effects of two differentlydesigned magnetic funtional appliances due to theanterior openbite or overbite values in treatment ofhigh angle skeletal Class II patients. Twenty-four retrognathie inferior patientswith skeletal Class II maloclusion 12 anterioropenbite patients with a mean chronological age of11.67±0.98 years, 12 patients without anterioropen-bite whose mean chronological age was11.54±0.77 years were treated with magnetic functional appliances. Posterior magnets were embedded in a repelling and anterior magnets were positioned in an attractive configuration in bothgroups. Lateral cephalometric films were taken atthe beginning and at the end of the treatment and48 measurements were calculated. Data was analyzed by paired t-test and Student’s t-test.Class II malocclusion was treated in bothgroups without increasing the SN/GoGn angle. Asignificant bite closure was observed in the openbitecases P

Keywords

• Class II malocclusion, magneticfunctional appliances, high angle cases

References

1. Nanda SK. Pattern of vertical growth in face. Am J Orthod 1988; 93: 103-16.
2. Van Spronsen PH, Weijs WA, Van Ginkel FC, Prahl-Andersen B. Jaw muscle orientation and moment arms of long-face and normal adults. J Dent Res 1996; 75: 1372-80.
3. Nielsen L. Vertical malocclusions: etiology, development, diagnosis and some aspects of treat- ment. Angle Orthod 1991; 61: 247-60.
4. İşcan HN, Dinçer M, Gültan A, Meral O, Taner-Sarisoy L. Effects of vertical chincap therapy on the mandibular morphology in open-bite patients Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2002; 122: 506-11.
5. Burke M, Jacobson A. Vertical changes in high-angle Class II, division 1 patients treated with cervical or occipital pull headgear. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1992; 102: 501-8.
6. İşcan HN, Akkaya S. Açık kapanış tedavisinde yaylı arka ısırma bloğu (spring-loaded posterior bite-block) uygulaması. Türk Ortodonti Derg 1989; 2: 160-72.
7. Darendeliler MA. Use of Magnetic Forces in Growth Modification. Semin Orthod 2006; 12: 41- 51.
8. Meral O, Yüksel S. Skeletal and Dental Effects During Observation and Treatment with a Magnetic Device. Angle Orthod 2003; 73: 716-22.

9. Ngan P, Wilson S, Florman M, Wei SHY. Treatment of Class II open bite in the mixed denti- tion with a removable functional appliance and head- gear. Quintessence Int 1992; 23: 323-33.
10. Yüksel S, Meral O, Üçem TT. Jasper Jumper- Oksipital Headgear ve Aktivatör- Oksipital headgear uygulamalarının Dentofasiyal Yapıya etki- leri, Türk Ortodonti Derg 1997; 10: 46-54.
11. Darendeliler MA, Joho JP. Magnetic activa- tor device II (MAD II) for correction of Class II, division 1 malocclusions. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1993; 103: 223-39.
12. Darendeliler MA, Yüksel S, Meral O. Open- bite correction with the magnetic activator device IV. J Clin Orthod 1995; 29: 569-76.
13. Greulich WW, Pyle SI. Radiographic Atlas of Skeletal Development of the Hand and Wrist. Stanford, CA, Stanford University Press, 1959.
14. Kuster R, Ingervall B. The effect of treat- ment of skeletal openbite with two types of bite- blocks. Eur J Orthod 1992; 14: 489-99.
15. Winner BJ. Statistical Principles in Experimental Design. New York, NY, McGraw-Hill Book Co, 1971.
16. Kiliaridis S, Egermark I, Thilander B. Anterior open bite treatment with magnets. Eur J Orthod 1990; 12: 447-57.
17. Altuna G, Woodside DG. Response of the midface to treatment with increased vertical occlusal forces: treatment and post-treatment effects in mon- key. Angle Orthod 1985; 55: 251-63.
18. Lopez-Gavito G, Wallen TR, Little RM, Joondeph DR. Anterior open-bite malocclusion: a longitudinal 10 year post retention evaluation of orthodontically treated patients. Am J Orthod 1985; 87: 175-86.
19. Kalra V, Burstone CJ, Nanda R. Effects of fixed magnetic appliance on the dentofacial comp- lex. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 1989; 95: 467-78.
20. Woods MG, Nanda RS. Intrusion of posteri- or teeth with magnets: an experiment in growing baboons. Angle Orthod 1988; 58: 136-50.
21. Iscan HN, Akkaya S, Koralp E. The effects of the spring-loaded posterior bite-block on the ma- xillo-facial morphology. Eur J Orthod 1992; 14: 54- 60.
22. Barbre RE, Sinclair PM. A cephalometric evaluation of anterior open bite correction with the magnetic active vertical corrector. Angle Orthod 1991; 61: 93-102.
23. Weinbach JR, Smith RJ. Cephalometric changes during treatment with the open bite bionator. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1992; 101: 367-74.
24. Iscan HN, Sarisoy L. Comparison of the effects of passive posterior bite-blocks with different construction bites on the craniofacial and dentoal- veolar structures. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1997; 112: 171-8.