Does Maxillary Protraction with Alt-RAMEC
Protocol Affect Inferior Sclera Exposure? A Controlled
3dMD Study

Onem Ozbilen, Elvan; ACAR, YASEMİN BAHAR; YILMAZ, NURAY

doi:10.5152/TurkJOrthod.2020.0167

Does Maxillary Protraction with Alt-RAMEC Protocol Affect Inferior Sclera Exposure? A Controlled 3dMD Study

Yasemin Bahar ACAR, (Department of Orthodontics, Marmara University, Faculty of Dentistry, İstanbul, Turkey)

Hanife Nuray Yılmaz, (Department of Orthodontics, Marmara University, Faculty of Dentistry, İstanbul, Turkey)

Elvan Önem ÖZBİLEN (Department of Orthodontics, Marmara University, Faculty of Dentistry, İstanbul, Turkey)

Turkish Journal of Orthodontics

1 1

Yıl: 2022 Cilt: 35 Sayı: 1 Sayfa Aralığı: 1 - 6 Metin Dili: İngilizce DOI: 10.5152/TurkJOrthod.2020.0167 İndeks Tarihi: 01-07-2022

Does Maxillary Protraction with Alt-RAMEC Protocol Affect Inferior Sclera Exposure? A Controlled 3dMD Study

Öz:

Objective: The purpose of this controlled retrospective study was to measure and evaluate the inferior sclera exposure changes using 3dMD stereophotogrammetric images in a prepubertal Class III patient sample that underwent maxillary protraction with alternate rapid maxillary expansions and constrictions protocol followed by facemask. Methods: The study group included 15 prepubertal patients (mean age: 9.85 ± 1.44 years) with Class III malocclusion due to maxillary retrognathism. Nine weeks of alternate rapid maxillary expansions and constrictions protocol was followed prior to 7 months of face mask treatment and 3 months of retention with Bionator. Pretreatment (T0) and post-retention (T1) lateral cephalometric radiographs and 3dMD images were retrieved from clinical archive. The same records were used for a control group of 15 well-matched, untreated patients (mean age: 9.4 ± 0.79 years). The distance between the upper eyelid margin and the lower eyelid margin was recorded as the overall eye height (E), and the distance between inferior limbus and the lower eyelid margin was recorded as inferior sclera exposure (S). The S : E ratio in percentage was calculated. Sella-nasion-A point angle (SNA) was used as the skeletal variable. Results: SNA angle, right S : E, and left S : E changed significantly in both groups at T1-T0. The intergroup comparison was highly significant for SNA angle but was not significant for right and left S : E variables. Conclusion: The S : E ratio decreased significantly in both alternate rapid maxillary expansions and constrictions/facemask and the control groups. However, the change in S : E ratio between groups was not significant. Keywords: Alt-RAMEC, Angle Class III, maxillary retrusion, sclera, stereophotogrammetry

Anahtar Kelime:

Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık

1. Ellis E 3rd, McNamara JA Jr. Components of adult class III malocclusion. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 1984;42(5):295-305. [CrossRef]
2. Guyer EC, Ellis EE 3rd, McNamara JA Jr, Behrents RG. Components of class III malocclusion in juveniles and adolescents. Angle Orthod. 1986;56(1):7-30. [CrossRef]
3. McNamara JA Jr. An orthopedic approach to the treatment of class III malocclusion in young patients. J Clin Orthod. 1987;21(9):598-608.
4. Baik HS. Clinical results of the maxillary protraction in Korean children. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1995;108(6):583-592. [CrossRef]
5. Turley PK. Orthopedic correction of class III malocclusion with palatal expansion and custom protraction headgear. J Clin Orthod. 1988;22(5):314-325.
6. Baccetti T, Franchi L, McNamara JA Jr. Treatment and posttreatment craniofacial changes after rapid maxillary expansion and facemask therapy. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2000;118(4):404-413. [CrossRef]
7. Liou EJ, Tsai WC. A new protocol for maxillary protraction in cleft patients: repetitive weekly protocol of alternate rapid maxillary expansions and constrictions. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2005;42(2):121- 127. [CrossRef]
8. Liou EJ. Effective maxillary orthopedic protraction for growing class III patients: a clinical application simulates distraction osteogenesis. Prog Orthod. 2005;6(2):154-171.
9. Isci D, Turk T, Elekdag-Turk S. Activation–deactivation rapid palatal expansion and reverse headgear in class III cases. Eur J Orthod. 2010;32(6):706-715. [CrossRef]
10. Williams MD, Sarver DM, Sadowsky PL, Bradley E. Combined rapid maxillary expansion and protraction facemask in the treatment of class III malocclusions in growing children: a prospective long-term study. Semin Orthod. 1997;3(4):265-274. [CrossRef]
11. Foersch M, Jacobs C, Wriedt S, Hechtner M, Wehrbein H. Effectiveness of maxillary protraction using facemask with or without maxillary expansion: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Oral Investig. 2015;19(6):1181-1192. [CrossRef]
12. Wang YC, Chang PM, Liou EJ. Opening of circumaxillary sutures by alternate rapid maxillary expansions and constrictions. Angle Orthod. 2009;79(2):230-234. [CrossRef]
13. Pessa JE, Zadoo VP, Mutimer KL, et al. Relative maxillary retrusion as a natural consequence of aging: combining skeletal and soft-tissue changes into an integrated model of midfacial aging. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1998;102(1):205-212. [CrossRef]
14. Pessa JE. An algorithm of facial aging: verification of Lambros’s theory by three-dimensional stereolithography, with reference to the pathogenesis of midfacial aging, scleral show, and the lateral suborbital trough deformity. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2000;106(2):479- 488; discussion 489-490. [CrossRef]
15. Soydan SS, Bayram B, Sar C, Uckan S. Change in inferior sclera exposure following Le Fort I osteotomy in patients with midfacial retrognathia. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2014;72(1):166.e1-166.e5. [CrossRef]
16. Posnick JC, Sami A. Individuals With a long face growth pattern and excess inferior scleral exposure: is there improvement after maxillary (Le Fort I) advancement and vertical shortening? J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2015;73(9):1809-1815. [CrossRef]
17. Norouzi A, Chi G, Shafaee Fard S, et al. Scleral exposure alterations following Le Fort I osteotomy (with and without maxillary impaction) in skeletal class III patients: a before-and-after clinical trial. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2018;46(9):1480-1483. [CrossRef]
18. Magraw CB, Garaas R, Shaw A, Phillips C, Turvey TA. Changes in scleral exposure following modified Le Fort III osteotomy. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2015;120(2):119-124.e1. [CrossRef]
19. Kale B, Buyukcavus MH, Esenlik E. Comparison of the change in inferior sclera exposure after maxillary protraction with or without skeletal anchorage. Niger J Clin Pract. 2018;21(7):854-858. [CrossRef]
20. Sitaropoulou V, Yilmaz HN, Yilmaz B, Kucukkeles N. Three-dimensional evaluation of treatment results of the Alt-RAMEC and facemask protocol in growing patients. J Orofac Orthop. 2020;81(6):407- 418. [CrossRef]
21. Ort R, Metzler P, Kruse AL, et al. The reliability of a three-dimensional photo system- (3dMDface-) based evaluation of the face in cleft lip infants. Plast Surg Int. 2012;2012:138090. [CrossRef]
22. Dindaroğlu F, Kutlu P, Duran GS, Görgülü S, Aslan E. Accuracy and reliability of 3D stereophotogrammetry: a comparison to direct anthropometry and 2D photogrammetry. Angle Orthod. 2016;86(3):487-494. [CrossRef]
23. Aldridge K, Boyadjiev SA, Capone GT, DeLeon VB, Richtsmeier JT. Precision and error of three-dimensional phenotypic measures acquired from 3dMD photogrammetric images. Am J Med Genet A. 2005;138A(3):247-253. [CrossRef]
24. Lane C, Harrell W Jr. Completing the 3-dimensional picture. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2008;133(4):612-620. [CrossRef]
25. Ozbek MM, Miyamoto K, Lowe AA, Fleetham JA. Natural head posture, upper airway morphology and obstructive sleep apnoea severity in adults. Eur J Orthod. 1998;20(2):133-143. [CrossRef]
26. Chiu CS, Clark RK. Reproducibility of natural head position. J Dent. 1991;19(2):130-131. [CrossRef]
27. Krause M, Kruber D, Hümpfner-Hierl H, Sterker I, Hierl T. Threedimensional changes of scleral show after surgical treatment of endocrine orbitopathy. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2018;46(1) :44-49. [CrossRef]
28. Canturk BH, Celikoglu M. Comparison of the effects of face mask treatment started simultaneously and after the completion of the alternate rapid maxillary expansion and constriction procedure. Angle Orthod. 2015;85(2):284-291. [CrossRef]
29. da Luz Vieira G, de Menezes LM, de Lima EM, Rizzatto S. Dentoskeletal effects of maxillary protraction in cleft patients with repetitive weekly protocol of alternate rapid maxillary expansions and constrictions. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2009;46(4):391-398. [CrossRef]
30. Masucci C, Franchi L, Giuntini V, Defraia E. Short-term effects of a modified Alt-RAMEC protocol for early treatment of Class III malocclusion: a controlled study. Orthod Craniofac Res. 2014;17(4):259- 269. [CrossRef]
31. Do-de Latour TB, Ngan P, Martin CA, Razmus T, Gunel E. Effect of alternate maxillary expansion and contraction on protraction of the maxilla: a pilot study. Hong Kong Dent J. 2009;6:72-82.
32. Hreczko T, Farkas LG, Katic M. Clinical significance of age-related changes of the palpebral fissures between age 2 and 18 years in healthy Caucasians. Acta Chir Plast. 1990;32(4):194-204.
33. Björk A, Skieller V. Growth of the maxilla in three dimensions as revealed radiographically by the implant method. Br J Orthod. 1977;4(2):53-64. [CrossRef]
34. Iseri H, Solow B. Average surface remodeling of the maxillary base and the orbital floor in female subjects from 8 to 25 years: an implant study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1995;107(1):48-57. [CrossRef]
35. Kaygisiz E, Tuncer BB, Yüksel S, Tuncer C, Yildiz C. Effects of maxillary protraction and fixed appliance therapy on the pharyngeal airway. Angle Orthod. 2009;79(4):660-667. [CrossRef]

APA	ACAR Y, YILMAZ N, Onem Ozbilen E (2022). Does Maxillary Protraction with Alt-RAMEC Protocol Affect Inferior Sclera Exposure? A Controlled 3dMD Study. , 1 - 6. 10.5152/TurkJOrthod.2020.0167
Chicago	ACAR YASEMİN BAHAR,YILMAZ NURAY,Onem Ozbilen Elvan Does Maxillary Protraction with Alt-RAMEC Protocol Affect Inferior Sclera Exposure? A Controlled 3dMD Study. (2022): 1 - 6. 10.5152/TurkJOrthod.2020.0167
MLA	ACAR YASEMİN BAHAR,YILMAZ NURAY,Onem Ozbilen Elvan Does Maxillary Protraction with Alt-RAMEC Protocol Affect Inferior Sclera Exposure? A Controlled 3dMD Study. , 2022, ss.1 - 6. 10.5152/TurkJOrthod.2020.0167
AMA	ACAR Y,YILMAZ N,Onem Ozbilen E Does Maxillary Protraction with Alt-RAMEC Protocol Affect Inferior Sclera Exposure? A Controlled 3dMD Study. . 2022; 1 - 6. 10.5152/TurkJOrthod.2020.0167
Vancouver	ACAR Y,YILMAZ N,Onem Ozbilen E Does Maxillary Protraction with Alt-RAMEC Protocol Affect Inferior Sclera Exposure? A Controlled 3dMD Study. . 2022; 1 - 6. 10.5152/TurkJOrthod.2020.0167
IEEE	ACAR Y,YILMAZ N,Onem Ozbilen E "Does Maxillary Protraction with Alt-RAMEC Protocol Affect Inferior Sclera Exposure? A Controlled 3dMD Study." , ss.1 - 6, 2022. 10.5152/TurkJOrthod.2020.0167
ISNAD	ACAR, YASEMİN BAHAR vd. "Does Maxillary Protraction with Alt-RAMEC Protocol Affect Inferior Sclera Exposure? A Controlled 3dMD Study". (2022), 1-6. https://doi.org/10.5152/TurkJOrthod.2020.0167

APA	ACAR Y, YILMAZ N, Onem Ozbilen E (2022). Does Maxillary Protraction with Alt-RAMEC Protocol Affect Inferior Sclera Exposure? A Controlled 3dMD Study. Turkish Journal of Orthodontics, 35(1), 1 - 6. 10.5152/TurkJOrthod.2020.0167
Chicago	ACAR YASEMİN BAHAR,YILMAZ NURAY,Onem Ozbilen Elvan Does Maxillary Protraction with Alt-RAMEC Protocol Affect Inferior Sclera Exposure? A Controlled 3dMD Study. Turkish Journal of Orthodontics 35, no.1 (2022): 1 - 6. 10.5152/TurkJOrthod.2020.0167
MLA	ACAR YASEMİN BAHAR,YILMAZ NURAY,Onem Ozbilen Elvan Does Maxillary Protraction with Alt-RAMEC Protocol Affect Inferior Sclera Exposure? A Controlled 3dMD Study. Turkish Journal of Orthodontics, vol.35, no.1, 2022, ss.1 - 6. 10.5152/TurkJOrthod.2020.0167
AMA	ACAR Y,YILMAZ N,Onem Ozbilen E Does Maxillary Protraction with Alt-RAMEC Protocol Affect Inferior Sclera Exposure? A Controlled 3dMD Study. Turkish Journal of Orthodontics. 2022; 35(1): 1 - 6. 10.5152/TurkJOrthod.2020.0167
Vancouver	ACAR Y,YILMAZ N,Onem Ozbilen E Does Maxillary Protraction with Alt-RAMEC Protocol Affect Inferior Sclera Exposure? A Controlled 3dMD Study. Turkish Journal of Orthodontics. 2022; 35(1): 1 - 6. 10.5152/TurkJOrthod.2020.0167
IEEE	ACAR Y,YILMAZ N,Onem Ozbilen E "Does Maxillary Protraction with Alt-RAMEC Protocol Affect Inferior Sclera Exposure? A Controlled 3dMD Study." Turkish Journal of Orthodontics, 35, ss.1 - 6, 2022. 10.5152/TurkJOrthod.2020.0167
ISNAD	ACAR, YASEMİN BAHAR vd. "Does Maxillary Protraction with Alt-RAMEC Protocol Affect Inferior Sclera Exposure? A Controlled 3dMD Study". Turkish Journal of Orthodontics 35/1 (2022), 1-6. https://doi.org/10.5152/TurkJOrthod.2020.0167