Abstract
Maxillary protraction with expansion is the recommended treatment modality for growing patients with cleft lip and palate. The aim of this study was to compare the displacement of the craniofacial structures using Facemask and Maxgym for protractiontherapy.A3-Dfiniteelementmodelconsistingof185620tetrahedralshapedelementsand49807nodeswascreated using CT scan of a patient with UCLP. F1, F2, F3 represent protraction forces used for Facemask and M1, M2, M3 represent protractionforcesusedforMaxgym.E1representsSlowMaxillaryExpansionforceandE2representsRapidMaxillaryExpansion force. Protraction forces were applied parallel to the occlusal plane on the buccal side of the first premolars. Expansion forces were also applied on the lingual side of the first premolars and the first molars. The displacement of 13 representative nodes of craniofacial structures analyzed and compared. The selected nodes of dental and skeletal structures were displaced in sagittal direction under all loading conditions. Only protraction or expansion force results in displacement of craniofacial structures. Protraction with expansion forces resulted in larger displacement. Maxgymforcesproducegreaterdisplacementthan Facemask under all loading conditions. Maxgym may be used as an alternative to Facemask to treat midfacial deficiency
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Journal of Computational Methods in Sciences and Engineering
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
