Download PDF
CC BY 4.0 · Journal of Health and Allied Sciences NU 2023; 13(02): 177-186
DOI: 10.1055/s-0042-1755351
Review Article

Effectiveness of Management of Skeletal Class III Malocclusion during Primary, Mixed, and Permanent Dentition Period – A Literature Review

Amina Usman
1   Department of Pediatric and Preventive Dentistry, A.B Shetty Memorial Institute of Dental Sciences, Deralakatte, Mangalore, Karnataka, India
,
Amitha M. Hegde
1   Department of Pediatric and Preventive Dentistry, A.B Shetty Memorial Institute of Dental Sciences, Deralakatte, Mangalore, Karnataka, India
,
Rajmohan Shetty
1   Department of Pediatric and Preventive Dentistry, A.B Shetty Memorial Institute of Dental Sciences, Deralakatte, Mangalore, Karnataka, India
,
Manju R.
1   Department of Pediatric and Preventive Dentistry, A.B Shetty Memorial Institute of Dental Sciences, Deralakatte, Mangalore, Karnataka, India
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Skeletal class III malocclusion is one of the most challenging conditions in clinical dental practice. Various treatment options are available for the management of the condition such as reverse twin block appliance, facemask appliance, chin cup therapy, bone anchorage maxillary protraction device, and tandem traction bow appliance. However, treatment timing is controversial. There are various advantages and disadvantages following the correction of skeletal class III malocclusion during primary, mixed and permanent dentition period. Hence, this review aims to compile the available literature regarding the effectiveness of correction of skeletal class III malocclusion during primary, mixed, and permanent dentition.

Keywords

class III malocclusion - reverse twin block appliance - treatment timing


Publication History

Article published online:
10 October 2022

© 2022. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, permitting unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is properly cited. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India

 

  • References

  • 1 Kumar Shetty S, Kumar Y M, Sreelekshmi KM, Brigit Alphonsa Gervasis. Impact of heredity on class III malocclusion. International Journal of Applied Dental Sciences. 2019; 5 (04) 276-279
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 2 Suzuki S. Studies on the so-called reverse occlusion. J Nihon Univ Sch Dent 1962; 4 (02) 51-58
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 3 Griffiths A, Doebley J, Peichel C, Wassarman DA. Introduction to Genetic Analysis. 12th edition, 2020. ISBN:9781319337810
  • 4 Albert AM, Payne AL, Brady SM, Wrighte C. Craniofacial Changes in Children-Birth to Late Adolescence. ARC J. Forensic Sci 2019; 4: 1-9
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 5 Page DC. “Real” early orthodontic treatment. From birth to age 8. Funct Orthod 2003; 20 (1-2): 48-54
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 6 Sayar G, Kılınç DD. Rapid maxillary expansion outcomes according to midpalatal suture maturation levels. Prog Orthod 2019; 20 (01) 27
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 Buschang PH, Santos-Pinto A, Demirjian A. Incremental growth charts for condylar growth between 6 and 16 years of age. Eur J Orthod 1999; 21 (02) 167-173
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 Westwood PV, McNamara Jr JA, Baccetti T, Franchi L, Sarver DM. Long-term effects of class III treatment with rapid maxillary expansion and facemask therapy followed by fixed appliances. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2003; 123 (03) 306-320
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 9 Cha KS. Skeletal changes of maxillary protraction in patients exhibiting skeletal class III malocclusion: a comparison of three skeletal maturation groups. Angle Orthod 2003; 73 (01) 26-35
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 10 Joondeph DR. Early orthodontic treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1993; 104 (02) 199-200
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 11 Campbell PM. The dilemma of Class III treatment. Early or late?. Angle Orthod 1983; 53 (03) 175-191
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 12 Zere E, Chaudhari PK, Sharan J, Dhingra K, Tiwari N. Developing Class III malocclusions: challenges and solutions. Clin Cosmet Investig Dent 2018; 10: 99-116
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 13 Ngan P, Hu AM, Fields Jr HW. Treatment of Class III problems begins with differential diagnosis of anterior crossbites. Pediatr Dent 1997; 19 (06) 386-395
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 14 Hopkin GB, Houston WJ, James GA. The cranial base as an aetiological factor in malocclusion. Angle Orthod 1968; 38 (03) 250-255
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 15 Guyer EC, Ellis III EE, McNamara Jr JA, Behrents RG. Components of class III malocclusion in juveniles and adolescents. Angle Orthod 1986; 56 (01) 7-30
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 16 Ngan P, Musich D. Early class III treatment decision making. APOS Trends Orthod 2019; 9 (02) 68-72
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 17 Sargod SS, Shetty N, Shabbir A. Early class III management in deciduous dentition using reverse twin block. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2013; 31 (01) 56-60
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 18 Saadia M, Torres E. Sagittal changes after maxillary protraction with expansion in class III patients in the primary, mixed, and late mixed dentitions: a longitudinal retrospective study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2000; 117 (06) 669-680
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 19 Kapust AJ, Sinclair PM, Turley PK. Cephalometric effects of face mask/expansion therapy in Class III children: a comparison of three age groups. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1998; 113 (02) 204-212
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 20 Baccetti T, Franchi L, McNamara Jr JA. Treatment and posttreatment craniofacial changes after rapid maxillary expansion and facemask therapy. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2000; 118 (04) 404-413
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 21 Bedolla-Gaxiola HA, Garrigós-Esparza D, Hernández-Cabanillas JC, Rosales-Berber MÁ, Pozos-Guillén A, Garrocho-Rangel JA. Quick correction of a skeletal class III maloclussion in primary dentition with face mask plus rapid maxillary expansion therapy. Odovtos-Int J Dent Sci 2018; 20 (02) 31-37
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 22 Barrett AAF, Baccetti T, McNamara Jr JA. Treatment effects of the light-force chincup. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2010; 138 (04) 468-476
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 23 Sugawara J. Clinical practice guidelines for developing class III malocclusion. In: Nanda R. ed. Biomechanics and Esthetic Strategies in Clinical Orthodontics. Farmington, Cannecticut, United States: Saunders; 2005: 211-263
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 24 Sakamoto T. Effective timing for the application of orthopedic force in the skeletal class III malocclusion. Am J Orthod 1981; 80 (04) 411-416
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 25 Kajiyama K, Murakami T, Suzuki A. Comparison of orthodontic and orthopedic effects of a modified maxillary protractor between deciduous and early mixed dentitions. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2004; 126 (01) 23-32
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 26 Gnanashanmugam D, Kannan D. A review on assessment and treatment strategies for class III malocclusion. Eur J Mol Clin Med 2020; 7 (04) 1645-1652
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 27 Melsen B, Melsen F. The postnatal development of the palatomaxillary region studied on human autopsy material. Am J Orthod 1982; 82 (04) 329-342
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 28 Baccetti T, McGill JS, Franchi L, McNamara Jr JA, Tollaro I. Skeletal effects of early treatment of class III malocclusion with maxillary expansion and face-mask therapy. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1998; 113 (03) 333-343
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 29 Franchi L, Baccetti T, McNamara JA. Postpubertal assessment of treatment timing for maxillary expansion and protraction therapy followed by fixed appliances. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2004; 126 (05) 555-568
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 30 Mandall N, Cousley R, DiBiase A. et al. Early class III protraction facemask treatment reduces the need for orthognathic surgery: a multi-centre, two-arm parallel randomized, controlled trial. J Orthod 2016; 43 (03) 164-175
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 31 Ngan P, Yiu C, Hu A, Hägg U, Wei SH, Gunel E. Cephalometric and occlusal changes following maxillary expansion and protraction. Eur J Orthod 1998; 20 (03) 237-254
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 32 Lin Y, Guo R, Hou L, Fu Z, Li W. Stability of maxillary protraction therapy in children with class III malocclusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Oral Investig 2018; 22 (07) 2639-2652
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 33 Sharma A, Joshi SR, Hegde AM, Shetty R. Early treatment of class III malocclusion with modified tandem traction bow appliance and a brief literature review. Oral Health Dent Manag 2014; 13 (03) 647-651
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 34 Sukh R, Singh GP, Tandon P. A new modified tandem appliance for management of developing class III malocclusion. Contemp Clin Dent 2013; 4 (04) 515-519
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 35 Kim HJ, Chun Y, Lim WH. Maxillary protraction effects of TTBA (tandem traction bow appliance) therapy in Korean class III children. Korean J Orthod 2007; 37: 231-240
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 36 Atalay Z, Tortop T. Dentofacial effects of a modified tandem traction bow appliance. Eur J Orthod 2010; 32 (06) 655-661
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 37 Mittal M, Singh H, Kumar A, Sharma P. Reverse twin block for interceptive management of developing class III malocclusion. J Indian Soc Pedod Prev Dent 2017; 35 (01) 86-89
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 38 Kidner G, DiBiase A, DiBiase D. Class III twin blocks: a case series. J Orthod 2003; 30 (03) 197-201
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 39 Shriranjani S, Deshmukh S, Rahalkar JS. et al. Skeletal and dentoalveolar effects produced by reverse twin block appliance in class III malocclusion in growing patients-a systematic review. Scholars J Appl Med Sci 2017; 5 (9C): 3654-3656
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 40 Saveen NS, Paul RT, Jose J, Deepak PR, Drisya S, Lakshmanan L. Treatment of developing skeletal class III malocclusion, using FR-III appliance: a case report. Int J Oral Health Dent 2015; 1 (01) 38-45
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 41 Sugawara J, Aymach Z, Hin H, Nanda R. One-phase vs 2-phase treatment for developing class III malocclusion: a comparison of identical twins. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2012; 141 (01) e11-e22
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 42 Al-Khalifa HN, Hashem MI, Alanazi KJ, Anil S. Orthopedic effect of chin cup during mixed dentition stage. J Contemp Dent Pract 2017; 18 (05) 410-414
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 43 Alarcón JA, Requena MA, Delgado AC, González E, Martín C. Association between changes in soft and hard tissue after early chin cup treatment. J Orofac Orthop 2015; 76 (03) 225-239
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 44 Deguchi T, McNamara JA. Craniofacial adaptations induced by chincup therapy in class III patients. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1999; 115 (02) 175-182
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 45 Akin M, Ucar FI, Chousein C, Sari Z. Effects of chincup or facemask therapies on the orofacial airway and hyoid position in class III subjects. J Orofac Orthop 2015; 76 (06) 520-530
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 46 Lin HC, Chang HP, Chang HF. Treatment effects of occipitomental anchorage appliance of maxillary protraction combined with chincup traction in children with class III malocclusion. J Formos Med Assoc 2007; 106 (05) 380-391
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 47 Abdelnaby YL, Nassar EA. Chin cup effects using two different force magnitudes in the management of class III malocclusions. Angle Orthod 2010; 80 (05) 957-962
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 48 Battagel JM, Orton HS. Class III malocclusion: the post-retention findings following a non-extraction treatment approach. Eur J Orthod 1993; 15 (01) 45-55
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 49 Pattanaik S, Mishra S. Treatment of class III with facemask therapy. Case Rep Dent 2016; 2016: 6390637
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 50 Rajasekaran UB, Abdulla K. Interception of skeletal class 3 malocclusion with Frankle 3 appliance in late mixed dentition. Sebha Medical Journal 2012; 10(02)
  • 51 Fareen N, Alam MK, Khamis MF, Mokhtar N. Treatment effects of reverse twin-block and reverse pull face mask on craniofacial morphology in early and late mixed dentition children. Orthod Craniofac Res 2017; 20 (03) 134-139
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 52 Singh SP, Kumar V, Verma R, Singh S. Management of developing skeletal class III malocclusion in a prepubertal girl with prognathic mandible in late mixed dentition. Contemp Clin Dent 2017; 8 (01) 139-144
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 53 Azamian Z, Shirban F. Treatment options for class III malocclusion in growing patients with emphasis on maxillary protraction. Scientifica (Cairo) 2016; 2016: 8105163
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 54 Van Hevele J, Nout E, Claeys T, Meyns J, Scheerlinck J, Politis C. Bone-anchored maxillary protraction to correct a class III skeletal relationship: a multicenter retrospective analysis of 218 patients. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 2018; 46 (10) 1800-1806
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 55 Cha BK, Ngan PW. Skeletal anchorage for orthopedic correction of growing class III patients. Semin Orthod 2011; 17: 124-137
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 56 De Clerck HJ, Cornelis MA, Cevidanes LH, Heymann GC, Tulloch CJ. Orthopedic traction of the maxilla with miniplates: a new perspective for treatment of midface deficiency. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2009; 67 (10) 2123-2129
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 57 Feng X, Li J, Li Y, Zhao Z, Zhao S, Wang J. Effectiveness of TAD-anchored maxillary protraction in late mixed dentition. Angle Orthod 2012; 82 (06) 1107-1114
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 58 Jackson GW, Kravitz ND. Expansion/facemask treatment of an adult class III malocclusion. Case Rep Dent 2014; 2014: 270257
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 59 Jatol-Tekade S, Tekade SA, Sarode SC, Sarode GS, Patil S. Treatment of class III malocclusion at later stage of growth. World J Dent 2017; 8 (05) 417-421
    CrossrefSearch in Google Scholar
  • 60 Singh H, Kapoor P, Sharma P, Maurya RK, Mittal T. Skeletal class III correction in permanent dentition using reverse twin block appliance and fixed mechanotherapy. Saudi Dent J 2018; 30 (04) 379-388
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 61 Cordasco G, Matarese G, Rustico L. et al. Efficacy of orthopedic treatment with protraction facemask on skeletal class III malocclusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Orthod Craniofac Res 2014; 17 (03) 133-143
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 62 Kuroda T, Deguchi Sr T, Kageyama T, Kawahara I. Chincup therapy for a young woman with anterior displacement and obtuse angle of the mandible in class I malocclusion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2006; 129 (04) 562-570
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 63 Ngan P. Early treatment of class III malocclusion: is it worth the burden?. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2006; 129 :(4, Suppl) S82-S85
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar