Comparison of treatment effects of different maxillary protraction methods in skeletal class III patients

Objective: The aim of this study was to compare treatment outcomes with different maxillary protraction methods in patients with skeletal Class III malocclusion resulting from maxillary retrognathia. Setting and Sample Population: A total of 55 individuals consisting of 29 females and 26 males with a mean age of 11.4 ± 1.06 years were included in this study. Material and Methods: Fifty-five treated maxillary retrognathic patients who underwent different protraction facemask methods were evaluated. Eighteen patients treated with RME were in the first group, and 19 patients treated with a modified AltRAMEC protocol were in the second group; eighteen patients on whom face masks with miniplates were applied were included in the skeletal anchorage (SA) group. Thirty measurements were made on lateral cephalometric radiographs before and after treatment. Differences between the groups were assessed with the ANOVA test. Results: The mean age was higher in the SA group (11.96 ± 0.92 years) compared with the other groups. The mean ANB angle increased by 2.96°, 4.91° and 3.86° in the RME, Alt-RAMEC and SA groups, respectively. The forward movement of the maxilla was similar between the groups. However, while the rate of protraction was higher in the modified Alt-RAMEC group, a greater skeletal effect was found in the SA group. Conclusion: The most effective method in terms of skeletal effect is the application of the face mask with skeletal anchorage; the modified Alt-RAMEC protocol can be applied before face mask to obtain faster protraction.No sponso