[A comparative study of the efficacy of customized titanium plates versus conventional maxillary protraction in the treatment of skeletal class Ⅲ patients]
F Wang,S Chang,S R Liang,C C Ren,X J Xie,Y X Bai
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.cn112144-20240418-00158
2024-09-09
Abstract:Objective: To compare the clinical efficacy of customized titanium plate and conventional maxillary protraction treatment in patients with skeletal class Ⅲ malocclusion during growth spurt. Methods: During growth spurt, skeletal class Ⅲ patients with maxillary hypoplasia who were treated in the Department of Orthodontics, Capital Medical University School of Stomatology from August 2018 to July 2021 were prospectively enrolled. They were treated with maxillary protraction using customized titanium plates (customized titanium plate group) and conventional methods (conventional protraction group), respectively. Lateral cephalometric radiographs were collected before and after treatment for conventional cephalometric analysis, including SNA angle (angle between Sella, Nasion and A point), ANB angle (angle between A point, Nasion, and B point), FH-MP angle (mandibular plane angle), Y-axis angle, U1-L1 angle (upper to lower central incisor angle), U1-SN angle (upper incisor to SN plane angle), anterior and lower height, maxillary length, etc. The stable basicranial line (SBL) was used as the reference line to measure the distance from each reference point (ANS point, A point, Prn point, Sn point, UL point etc.) to the stable basicranial vertical line (VerT, the perpendicular line of the skull base line at the intersection point of the anterior wall of the sella image and the inferior edge of the anterior bed process). Paired t-tests were performed on the cephalometric data before and after maxillary protraction treatment in the two groups, and two independent samples t-tests were performed to compare the differences in the efficacy of the two maxillary protraction methods. Results: A total of 20 patients (9 males and 11 females), aged (10.8±1.3) years, were included in the personalized titanium plate group. A total of 20 patients (8 males and 12 females), aged (10.5±1.1) years, were included in the conventional protraction group. The SNA angle, ANB angle, FH-MP angle, Y-axis angle, anterior lower height, maxillary length, ANS-VerT distance, A-VerT distance, Prn-VerT distance, Sn-VerT distance, and UL-VerT distance were significantly higher than those before treatment in the two groups (P<0.05). The changes of SNA angle, ANB angle and A-VerT before and after treatment in the personalized titanium plate group [3.15°±2.28°, 4.64°±1.40°, (4.41±3.43) mm, respectively] were significantly higher than those in the traditional group [2.13°±2.69°, 2.81°±1.10°, (3.13±4.76) mm, respectively](P<0.05), and the changes of U1-L1 angle and U1-SN angle before and after treatment (-0.76°±7.42° and 1.74°±6.38°, respectively) was significantly lower than that of the control group (-5.14°±6.62° and 4.57°±5.24°, respectively, P<0.05). Conclusions: Maxillary protraction can effectively improve skeletal class Ⅲ relationships in growing patients. The linear measurements using the SBL line as a reference plane visualize the sagittal improvement in sagittal relationship after maxillary protraction. The customized titanium plate maxillary protraction treatment has a clear therapeutic effect on patients with skeletal class Ⅲ deformities, and its dental effect is relatively small.