Abstract
ABSTRACTTransverse deficiencies should be a priority in orthodontic treatment, and should be corrected as soon as diagnosed, to restore the correct transverse relationship between maxilla and mandible and, consequently, normal maxillary growth. Corrections may be performed at the skeletal level, by opening the midpalatal suture, or by dentoalveolar expansion. The choice of a treatment alternative depends on certain factors, such as age, sex, degree of maxillary hypoplasia and maturation of the midpalatal suture. Thus, the present study discusses different treatment approaches to correct maxillary hypoplasia in patients with advanced skeletal maturation.
Highlights
Transverse deficiency,[1] or maxillary hypoplasia,[2] is one of the most detrimental problems to facial growth and to the integrity of the dentoalveolar structures
The objective of this study was to analyze and discuss different treatment approaches for the correction of maxillary deficiencies in patients with advanced skeletal maturation, and describe the treatment of a female patient (14 years and 4 months old) presenting Class II skeletal malocclusion, transverse maxillary hypoplasia and unilateral functional unilateral posterior crossbite — this case was submitted to the Brazilian Board of Orthodontics (BBO)
The patient’s skeletal pattern was preserved, and there was a discrete improvement of the anteroposterior relationship of the basal bones (ANB = -2 ̊, Wits = -6 mm) and discrete increase of the mandibular plane inclination (SN.GoGn = 41.5 ̊)
Summary
Transverse deficiency,[1] or maxillary hypoplasia,[2] is one of the most detrimental problems to facial growth and to the integrity of the dentoalveolar structures. It should be corrected as soon as diagnosed, to reestablish a normal transverse skeletal relationship between basal bones, fundamental to achieving a satisfactory and stable occlusion. It is usually characterized by posterior crossbite that may be unilateral or bilateral, total or partial, and may even not be present in cases with simultaneous mandibular arch constriction. A Class II relationship may disguise a transversal involvement of the maxilla due to a posterior positioning of the mandibular arch, whereas in Class III, the anterior positioning of the mandible may accentuate maxillary deficiency or even project a non-existent deficiency
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 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 callDisclaimer: 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.
