Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · European Journal of General Dentistry 2017; 6(01): 59-64
DOI: 10.4103/2278-9626.198619
Case Report

Early interception of mandibular shifting: A longitudinal approach from deciduous through mixed and permanent dentitions

Isabelle Adad Fornazari
1   Department of Orthodontics, School of Life Sciences, Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Paraná, Curitiba, Brazil
,
Oscar Mario Antelo
1   Department of Orthodontics, School of Life Sciences, Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Paraná, Curitiba, Brazil
2   Department of Orthodontics, Universidad Intercontinental, D.F., Mexico, Brazil
,
Leonardo Likes Locks
1   Department of Orthodontics, School of Life Sciences, Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Paraná, Curitiba, Brazil
,
Armando Yukio Saga
3   Department of Orthodontics, School of Health and Biosciences, Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Paraná, Curitiba, Brazil
,
Orlando Motohiro Tanaka
3   Department of Orthodontics, School of Health and Biosciences, Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Paraná, Curitiba, Brazil
4   The Center for Advanced Dental Education, SLU, MO, USA
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
Also available at
  PDF Download Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

A Class II malocclusion with a unilateral posterior crossbite in the late deciduous dentition is a challenging type of malocclusion to intercept. The objective is to analyze the long-term changes in a patient with a skeletal Class II division 1 malocclusion. A 5-year-old female child who was referred from a pediatric dentist came for consultation. Correction of posterior crossbite involves expansion of the maxillary arch with the aim of removal of occlusal interferences and elimination of the functional shift of the mandible. The treatment comprised three stages: (1) Expansion of the maxillary arch was performed with a modified Haas palatal expander and the clinical procedures thus resulted in improved facial symmetry and satisfactory functional occlusion in the mixed dentition (8 years 10 months). (2) Distalization of maxillary first molars was done with a Kloehn type headgear and a lip bumper was placed in the mandible to maintain the arch perimeter (12 years). (3) A 0.022 inch × 0.028 inch standard edgewise fixed appliance was used for comprehensive orthodontic treatment and the objectives were accomplished (14 years 5 months). The results showed great improvements in function and esthetics, and posttreatment stability was good after 7 years and 5 months.

Keywords

Headgear - interception - mandibular shifting - palatal expansion


Publication History

Article published online:
01 November 2021

© 2017. European Journal of General Dentistry. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial-License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.)

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

 

  • References

  • 1 Karaiskos N, Wiltshire WA, Odlum O, Brothwell D, Hassard TH. Preventive and interceptive orthodontic treatment needs of an inner-city group of 6- and 9-year-old Canadian children. J Can Dent Assoc 2005;71:649.
  • 2 Chaudhry A, Sidhu MS, Chaudhary G, Grover S, Chaudhry N, Kaushik A. Evaluation of stress changes in the mandible with a fixed functional appliance: A finite element study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2015;147:226-34.
  • 3 McNamara JA Jr. Components of class II malocclusion in children 8-10 years of age. Angle Orthod 1981;51:177-202.
  • 4 de Bittencourt Neto AC, Saga AY, Pacheco AA, Tanaka O. Therapeutic approach to Class II, division 1 malocclusion with maxillary functional orthopedics. Dental Press J Orthod 2015;20:99-125.
  • 5 Kloehn SJ. Guiding alveolar growth and eruption of teeth to reduce treatment time and produce a more balanced denture and face. Angle Orthod 1947;17:10-23.
  • 6 Kurol J, Berglund L. Longitudinal study and cost-benefit analysis of the effect of early treatment of posterior cross-bites in the primary dentition. Eur J Orthod 1992;14:173-9.
  • 7 Frey CJ, Full CA. Correction of combined anterior and posterior crossbites in the primary dentition with fixed appliances: Case report. Pediatr Dent 1988;10:105-7.
  • 8 Lindauer SJ. Asymmetries: Diagnosis and treatment. Semin Orthod 1998;4:133.
  • 9 Thiesen G, Gribel BF, Freitas MP. Facial asymmetry: A current review. Dental Press J Orthod 2015;20:110-25.
  • 10 Cheong YW, Lo LJ. Facial asymmetry: Etiology, evaluation, and management. Chang Gung Med J 2011;34:341-51.
  • 11 Shu R, Han X, Wang Y, Xu H, Ai D, Wang L, et al. Comparison of arch width, alveolar width and buccolingual inclination of teeth between Class II division 1 malocclusion and Class I occlusion. Angle Orthod 2013;83:246-52.
  • 12 McNamara JA Jr. Long-term adaptations to changes in the transverse dimension in children and adolescents: An overview. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2006;129 4 Suppl: S71-4.
  • 13 Kennedy DB, Osepchook M. Unilateral posterior crossbite with mandibular shift: A review. J Can Dent Assoc 2005;71:569-73.
  • 14 Melink S, Vagner MV, Hocevar-Boltezar I, Ovsenik M. Posterior crossbite in the deciduous dentition period, its relation with sucking habits, irregular orofacial functions, and otolaryngological findings. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2010;138:32-40.
  • 15 Malandris M, Mahoney EK. Aetiology, diagnosis and treatment of posterior cross-bites in the primary dentition. Int J Paediatr Dent 2004;14:155-66.
  • 16 Burstone CJ. Diagnosis and treatment planning of patients with asymmetries. Semin Orthod 1998;4:153-64.
  • 17 Janson G, de Freitas MR, Araki J, Franco EJ, Barros SE. Class III subdivision malocclusion corrected with asymmetric intermaxillary elastics. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2010;138:221-30.
  • 18 Janson G, Dainesi EA, Henriques JF, de Freitas MR, de Lima KJ. Class II subdivision treatment success rate with symmetric and asymmetric extraction protocols. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2003;124:257-64.
  • 19 Nanda R, Margolis MJ. Treatment strategies for midline discrepancies. Semin Orthod 1996;2:84-9.
  • 20 Legan HL. Surgical correction of patients with asymmetries. Semin Orthod 1998;4:189-98.
  • 21 Minich CM, Araújo EA, Behrents RG, Buschang PH, Tanaka OM, Kim KB. Evaluation of skeletal and dental asymmetries in Angle Class II subdivision malocclusions with cone-beam computed tomography. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2013;144:57-66.
  • 22 Volk T, Sadowsky C, Begole EA, Boice P. Rapid palatal expansion for spontaneous class II correction. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2010;137:310-5.
  • 23 Alamoudi N. The correlation between occlusal characteristics and temporomandibular dysfunction in Saudi Arabian children. J Clin Pediatr Dent 2000;24:229-36.
  • 24 Sari S, Sonmez H, Oray GO, Camdeviren H. Temporomandibular joint dysfunction and occlusion in the mixed and permanent dentition. J Clin Pediatr Dent 1999;24:59-62.
  • 25 Lima Filho RM, Lima AL, de Oliveira Ruellas AC. Mandibular changes in skeletal class II patients treated with Kloehn cervical headgear. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2003;124:83-90.