Download PDF
Informationen aus Orthodontie & Kieferorthopädie 2015; 47(02): 73-79
DOI: 10.1055/s-0035-1549951
Übersichtsartikel
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Kieferorthopädische Grenzfälle: Kompensation versus Chirurgie

Borderline Cases in Orthodontics: Compensation vs. Surgery
H. Neuner
1   Abteilung für Kieferorthopädie, Bernhard-Gottlieb-Universitätszahnklinik Wien, Österreich
,
K. Jäger
1   Abteilung für Kieferorthopädie, Bernhard-Gottlieb-Universitätszahnklinik Wien, Österreich
,
F. Weiland
1   Abteilung für Kieferorthopädie, Bernhard-Gottlieb-Universitätszahnklinik Wien, Österreich
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
03 July 2015 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Zusammenfassung

Als Borderline-Grenzfälle in der Kieferorthopädie werden Patienten mit moderater skelettaler Diskrepanz bezeichnet, die sowohl kieferorthopädisch als auch kieferorthopädisch-kieferchirurgisch behandelt werden können. Im folgenden Artikel werden, unterteilt in skelettale Klasse-II-und skelettale Klasse-III-Relation, die Vor- und Nachteile, kurz- und langfristig, der jeweiligen Behandlungsmethoden erörtert. Weiters wird auf die in der Literatur beschriebenen Entscheidungshilfen eingegangen.

Abstract

Orthodontic patients with moderate skeletal jaw discrepancies, who can be treated either orthodontically alone or with a combined orthodontic and surgical approach, are called „borderline cases“. The aim of this paper was to discuss short- and longterm advantages and disadvantages of different skeletal Class II and skeletal Class III malocclusion treatments. In addition we have tried to identify the decision-making criteria, described in the literature.

Schlüsselwörter

Grenzfälle - kombiniert kieferorthopädisch-kieferchirurgische Therapie - Camouflage-Therapie - Entscheidungshilfen

Key words

borderline cases - combined orthodontic and surgical approach - camouflage - decisionmaking criteria
 

  • Literatur

  • 1 Kelly JE, Harvey CR. An assessment of the occlusion of the teeth of youths 12-17 years. Vital Health Stat 11 1977; 162: 1-65
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Tammoscheit UG. Epidemologie, Pathogenese und Ätiologie. In: Miethke RR, Drescher D. Hrsg Kleines Lehrbuch der Angle- Klasse II/1 unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Behandlung. Berlin: Quintessenzverlag; 1996: 21
    Google Scholar
  • 3 Ngan PW, Bycek E, Scheick J. Longitudinal evaluation of growth changes in Class II division 1 subjects. Semin Orthod 1997; 3: 222-231
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Proffit WR, Field HW. Malocclusion and dentofacial deformity in contemporary society, in Contemporary Orthodontics. St Louis, MO: Mosby; 1993: 7-8
    Google Scholar
  • 5 Witzig TW, Yerkes I. Functional jaw orthopedics; Mastering more than technique. In Gelb H. (ed.) Clinical Management of Head Neck and TMJ Pain and Dysfunction (ed2). Philadelphia, PA: Saunders; 1985
    Google Scholar
  • 6 Owen AH. Orthodontic/orthopedic treatment of craniomandibular dysfunction. Part 2. Posterior condylar displacement. J Craniomandibular Pract 1984; 2: 333-349
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Kiyak HA, Bell R. Psychosocial considerations in surgery and orthodontics. In Proffit WR, White jr RP. (eds.) Surgical Orthodontic treatment. St Louis MO: Mosby; 1991: 71-96
    Google Scholar
  • 8 Thomas PM. Orthodontic camouflage versus orthognathic surgery in the treatment of mandibluar deficiency. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1995; 53: 579-587
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Kinzinger G, Frye L, Diedrich P. Class II Treatment in Adults: Comparing Camouflage Orthodontics, Dentofacial Orthopedics and Orthognathic Surgery- a cemphalometric study to evaluate various therapeutic effects. J Orofac Orthop 2008; 69: 63-91
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Dunlevy HA, White RP, Proffit WR et al. Professional and lay judgment of facial esthetic changes following orthognathic surgery. J Adult Orthod Orthognath Surg 1987; 2: 151-158
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Fränkel C, Fränkel R. Der Funktionsregler in der orofazialen Orthopädie. Heidelberg: Hüthig; 1992
    Google Scholar
  • 12 Sander FG. Herausnehmbare kieferorthopädische Geräte. In: Schmuth G. Hrsg Kieferorthopädie I. Praxis der Zahnheilkunde, Band 11. München, Wien, Baltimore: Urban & Schwarzberg; 1994: 131-220
    Google Scholar
  • 13 Sander FG, Wichelhaus A. Skelettale und dentale Veränderungen bei Anwendung der Vorschubdoppelplatte. Fortschr Kieferorthop 1995; 56: 127-139
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Mihalik CA, Proffit WR, Phillips C. Long term follow-up of Class II adults treated with orthodontic camouflage: A comparison with orthognathic surgery outcomes. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2003; 123: 266-278
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Proffit WR, Phillips C, Douvartzidis N. A comparison of outcomes of orthodontic and surgical orthodontic treatment of Class II malocclusion in adults. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1992; 101: 556-565
    Google Scholar
  • 16 Lohrmann B, Schwestka-Polly R, Nägerl H et al. The influence of orthodontics and mandibular sagittal split osteotomy on dental and skeletal variables – a comparative cephalometric study. Eur J Orthod 2006; 28: 553-560
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Proffit WR, White RP, Sarver DM. Contemporary treatment of dentofacial deformity. St Louis: Mosby; 2003
    Google Scholar
  • 18 Proffit WR, Ackermann JL. Diagnosis and treatment planning. in Graber TM, Vanarsdall Jr RL. (eds.) Orthodontics: Current Principals and Treatment. St Louis, MO: Mosby; 1994
    Google Scholar
  • 19 Bell R, Kiyak HA, Joondeph DR et al. Perceptions of facial profile and their influence on decision to undergo orthognathic surgery. Am J Orthod 1985; 88: 232
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Hambleton RS. The soft tissue covering the skeletal face as related to orthodontic problems. Am J Orthod 1964; 50: 405-420
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Riedel RA. An analysis of dentofacial relationships. Am J Orthod 1957; 43: 103-119
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Joss C, Joss-Vassalli I, Kiliaridis S et al. Soft tissue profile changes after bilateral sagittal split osteotomy for mandibular advancement: a systemic review. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2010; 86: 1260-1269
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Brusati R, Gianni A. Anterior mandibular apical base augmentation in the surgical orthodontic treatment of mandibular retrusion. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2005; 34: 846-850
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Joss CU, Thuer UW. Stability of the hard and soft tissue profile after mandibular advancement in sagittal split osteotomies: A longitudinal and long-term follow-up study. Eur J Orthod 2008; 30: 16-23
    Google Scholar
  • 25 Douma E, Kuftinec MM, Moshiri F. A comparative study of stability after mandiblar advancement surgery. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1991; 100: 141-155
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Joss C, Vassalli I. Stability after bilateral sagittal split osteotomy advancement surgery with rigid internal fixation: a systematic review. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2009; 67: 301-313
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Shaw WC, Richmond S, O’Brien KD. The use of occlusal indices: a European perspective. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1995; 107: 1-10
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Richmond S, Shaw WC, O’Brien KD et al. The development of the PAR Index (Peer Assessment Rating): reliability and validity. Eur J Orthod 1992; 14: 125-139
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Al Yami EA, Kuijpers-Jagtman AM, Van’t Hof MA. Stability of orthodontic treatment outcome: follow up until 10 years postretention. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1999; 115: 300-304
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Otuyemi OD, Jones SP. Long-term evaluation of treated Class II division 1 malocclusions utilizing the PAR index. Brit J Orthod 1995; 22: 171-178
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Blomqvist JE, Ahlborg G, Isaksson S et al. A comparison of skeletal stability after mandibular advancement and use of two rigid internal fixation techniques. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1997; 55: 568-574
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Mobarak KA, Espeland L, Krogstad O et al. Mandibular advancement surgery in high-angle and low-angle class II patients: different long-term skeletal responses. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2001; 119: 368-381
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Kierl MJ, Nanda RS, Currier GF. A 3- year evaluation of skeletal stability of mandibular advancement and rigid fixation. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1990; 48: 587-592
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Rubens BC, Stoelinga PJW, Blijdorp PA et al. Skeletal stability following sagittal split osteotomy using monocortical miniplates internal fixation. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1988; 17: 371-376
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Kallela I, Laine P, Suuronen R et al. Skeletal stability following mandibular advancement and rigid fixation with polylactide biodegradable screws. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1998; 27: 3-8
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Scheerlinck JPO, Stoelinga PJW, Blijdorp PA et al. Sagittal split advancement osteotomies stabilized with miniplates: A 2-5–year follow-up. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1994; 23: 127-131
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Proffit WR, Turvey TA, Phillips C. Orthognathic surgery: A hierarchy of stability. Int J Adult Orthod Orthognath Surg 1996; 11: 191-204
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Van Sickels JE, Dolce C, Keeling S et al. Technical factors accounting for stability of bilateral sagittal split osteotomy advancement. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 2000; 89: 19-23
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Thüer U, Ingervall B, Vuillemin T. Stability and effect on the soft tissue profile of mandibular advancement with sagittal split osteotomy advanvement. Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg 1994; 9: 175-185
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Schendel SA, Epker BN. Results after mandibular advancement surgery: An analysis of 87 cases. J Oral Surg 1980; 38: 265-282
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Kiyak HA, Bell R. Psychosocial considerations in surgery and orthodontics. In Proffit WR, White Jr RP. (eds.) Surgical-orthodontic treatment. Saint Louis: Mosby; 1991
    Google Scholar
  • 42 Phillips C, Proffit WR. The psychosocial effect of dentofacial deformity. In: Proffit WR, White Jr RP, Sarver DM. (eds.) Contemporary treatment of dentofacial deformitiy. St. Louis: Mosby; 2002
    Google Scholar
  • 43 Proffit WR, White RP, Sarver DM. Contemporary treatment of dentofacial deformity. St Louis: Mosby; 2003
    Google Scholar
  • 44 Jacobson A, Evans WG, Preston CB et al. Mandibular prognathism. Am J Orthod 1974; 66: 140-171
    Google Scholar
  • 45 Lin J, Gu Y. Preliminary investigation of nonsurgical treatment of severe skeletal Class III malokklusion in the permanent dentition. Angle Orthod 2003; 73: 401-410
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Schoenwetter R. Nonsurgical Class III orthodontic treatment. Angle Orthod 1977; 47: 147-155
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Sperry TP, Speidel TM, Isaacson RJ et al. The role of dental compensations in the orthodontic treatment of mandibular prognathism. Angle Orthod 1977; 47: 293-299
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 48 Johnston C, Burden D, Kennedy D et al. Class III surgical–orthodontic treatment: a cephalometric study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2006; 130: 300-309
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 49 Troy BA, Shanker S, Fields HW et al. Comparison of incisor inclination in patients with Class III malocclusion treated with orthognathic surgery or orthodontic camouflage. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2009; 135: 146.e1-146.e9 discussion 146-147 DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2008.07.012.
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 50 Burns NR, Musich DR, Martin C et al. Class III camouflage treatment: What are the limits?. Am J Orthod 2010; 137: 9e1-9e13
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 51 Worms FW, Isaacson RJ, Speidel TM. Surgical orthodontic treatment planning: profile analysis and mandibular surgery. Angle Orthod 1976; 46: 1-25
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 52 Vig SP, Weintraub JA, Brown C et al. The duration of orthodontic treatment with and without extractions: A pilot study of five selected practices. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1990; 97: 45-51
    Google Scholar
  • 53 Dowling P, Espeland L, Krogstad O et al. Duration of orthodontic treatment involving orthognathic surgery. Int J Adult Orthod Orthognath Surg 1999; 14: 146-152
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 54 Luther F, Morris DO, Karnezi K. Orthodontic treatment following orthognathic surgery: how long does it take and why? A retrospective study. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2007; 65: 1969-1976
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 55 Capelozza Filho L, Martins A, Mazottini R et al. Effects of dental decompensation on the surgical treatment of mandibular prognathism. Int J Adult Orthod Orthognath Surg 1996; 11: 165-180
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 56 Nagasaka H, Sugawara J, Kawamura H et al. Surgery first skeletal Class III correction using the Skeletal Anchorage System. J Clin Orthod 2009; 43: 97-105
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 57 Kim CS, Lee SC, Kyung HM et al. Stability of mandibular setback surgery with and without presurgical orthodontics. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2014; 72: 779-787
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 58 Yoshida K, Rivera GA, Matuso N et al. Long-term prognosis of BSSO mandibular relapse and its relation to different facial types. Angle Orthod 2000; 70: 220-226
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 59 Riedel RA. The relation of the maxillary structures to the cranium in malocclusion and normal occlusion. Angle Orthod 1952; 22: 140-145
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 60 Jacobson A. The Wits apprasial of jaw disharmony. Am J Orthod 1975; 67: 125-138
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 61 Stellzig-Eisenhauer A, Lux CJ, Schuster G. Treatment decision in adult patients with class III malocclusion: Orrthodontic therapie or orthognathic surgery?. Am J Orthod 2000; 122: 27-38
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 62 Proffit WR, Ackermann JL. A systematic approach to orthodontic diagnosis and treatment planning. In: Graber TM, Swain BF. (eds.) Current orthodontic concepts and techniques. 3rd (ed. Saint Louis: C. V. Mosby; 1985
    Google Scholar
  • 63 Kerr WJS, Miller S, Dawber JE. Class III malocclusion: surgery or orthodontics?. Br J Orthod 1992; 19: 21-24
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 64 Rabie AB, Wong RW, Min GU. Treatment in Borderline Class III Malocclusion: Orthodontic Camouflage (Extraction) Versus Orthognathic Surgery. Open Dent J 2008; 2: 38-48 DOI: 10.2174/1874210600802010038. Epub 2008 Mar 8
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 65 Rivera SM, Hatch JP, Dolce C et al. Patients’ own reasons and patient-perceived recommendations for orthognathic surgery. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2000; 118: 134-141
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar