 |
Skeletal Class II treatment requires harmonization
of the structures supporting the dentition,
as well as tooth movement, if an esthetic facial
appearance is to be achieved for the patient.
Harmonized skeletal bases need less tooth movement
and, in particular, less incisor root movement
to produce the dental correction. Therefore,
two-phase treatment, beginning with a first stage
of orthopedic therapy, is now a useful approach. Although a number of appliances are available
for orthopedic or functional therapy, many
of these are relatively inefficient or have unfavorable
dentoalveolar side effects. This article
presents a new design that incorporates features
of the original Bass Orthopedic System, 1-6 but
with a much simplified construction and clinical
technique. It is more comfortable for the patient
and hence is readily accepted for full-time wear. Appliance DesignThe Dynamax appliance has two components:
the upper part is removable, while the
lower can be either removable ( Fig. 1 ) or fixed as
a lingual arch with bands cemented to the first
molars. The fixed version is particularly helpful
in the late mixed dentition, when mechanical
retention of a removable appliance may be problematic.
It also acts as a space maintainer to preserve
the leeway space from the deciduous second
molars and thus reduce the need for extractions. 7 A fixed component requires less patient
cooperation and permits lower brackets to be
bonded simultaneously. Maxillary ComponentThe maxillary part ( Fig. 2 ) features: 1. Retention by means of Adams clasps on the
first molars and a modified anterior torquing
spring. 2,6,8 Clasps on the deciduous second
molars or second premolars are optional. Crozat-type
clasps may be used to advantage in the
mixed dentition, because they are generally more
retentive than Adams clasps at this stage. Acrylic
capping of the buccal segments and incisors may
be used for added retention, or instead of clasps
to make a simplified version when retention is
not a problem. 2. Maxillary expansion, produced by a palatal
spring. This is generally required to avoid the
development of posterior crossbite as the mandible grows forward. It also provides more space in
the maxillary arch. 3. Mandibular advancement, produced by vertical
spring projections in the first molar area that
engage lingual "shoulders" on the mandibular
component ( Fig. 3 ). The contact prevents the
mandible from dropping back from its protrusive
position, which is generally 3-4mm forward of
centric relation. Because the projections are on
the lingual side of the teeth, there is no occlusal
interference ( Fig. 4 ). This avoids the undesirable
increase in lower facial height that may accompany
the use of orthopedic appliances such as the
activator or Twin Block. 4,9 The vertical springs are 14mm long, permitting
the protrusive action of the appliance
over nearly the full range of mandibular opening.
The protrusive action of orthopedic appliances
that hold the forward position over a short range
of opening is often lost during speech or at
night, 10 since the majority of children sleep with
the mouth open. 11 In the Dynamax system, mandibular
protrusion is kept to a minimal 3-4mm,
allowing the contact between the upper and
lower parts of the appliance to act as a stimulus
to the musculature in developing an avoidance
reflex that will hold the mandible forward. Much
of the time there is actually a space between the
two components, as the patient will generally
hold the mandible farther forward and out of
contact. This minimizes the forces acting on the
dentition and thus any unwanted dentoalveolar
changes. The spring action of the vertical projections
acts as a stress breaker, but permits lateral
mandibular movements. 4. Occlusal coverage of the upper posterior teeth
with a 1mm thickness of acrylic ( Fig. 5 ), which
has the following effects: Unlocks the occlusion, allowing the mandible
to develop forward without interference from the
cusps of the posterior teeth.Distributes the extraoral forces across all the
upper teeth, reducing the pressure on individual
teeth to a comfortable level.Allows vertical forces to be applied to the
maxilla to prevent its normal downward growth
and assist in hinging the mandible forward. This
promotes advancement of pogonion, in contrast
to an opening of the maxillomandibular angle,
which results in the chin moving posteriorly.Allows eruption of the posterior teeth to be
controlled and, if necessary, completely prevented
by varying the thickness of the posterior capping
up to the width of the interocclusal freeway
space. This also has a positive effect on the direction
of mandibular growth and, coupled with
control of maxillary growth, assists in treatment
of high-angle cases. In low-angle cases, the
molars are allowed to erupt by keeping the capping
to a thickness of 1mm.5. Anterior torque control with the torquing
spring, which lies comfortably flat against the
facial surfaces of the incisors ( Fig. 6 ). Excessive
palatal tipping of the upper incisors, by trapping
the lower incisors, prevents full forward development
of the mandible and compromises the balance
of the facial profile. 12 Avoidance of tipping
also reduces the need for angulation in the fixed
appliance stage, which thus becomes simpler and
quicker. When less torque control is required,
2.5mm acrylic capping of the incisal edges can
be used instead of the spring. If the incisors are
proclined to start with, the spring and the capping
can be left off and the proclination corrected
with a facial elastic stretched from canine to
canine ( Fig. 4 ). 6. Eruption control of the lower incisors and leveling
of the curve of Spee with an anterior
biteplane at the level of the incisal edges. 7. Extraoral traction with a posterior high-pull
headgear to tubes in the second premolar region,
if desired ( Fig. 7 ). Heavy forces of as much as
1,000g per side can control the vertical development
of the face 13 and, with acrylic coverage of
the posterior teeth, can be used without patient
discomfort. A safety facebow design is essential
whenever extraoral traction is used 14 ( Fig. 7 C). Mandibular ComponentThe removable type comprises: 1. Retention with Adams or Crozat clasps on the
first molars and, if necessary, on the second
deciduous molars. Capping the lower incisors is
helpful to improve retention and to control tipping
of these teeth ( Fig. 8 ). Where there is a deep
curve of Spee and eruption of the posterior teeth
is required, the lower incisors should not be
capped. A "pull-down" design can also be used,
with capping of the buccal segments to provide
retention. 2. An acrylic body extending as far down the
lingual of the mandible as possible, without
overextending and causing trauma. 3. Acrylic "shoulders", 3mm deep, mesial to the
first molars ( Fig. 9 ). These contact the vertical
springs on the upper appliance to set the forward
position of the mandible. 4. A lip bumper, with the addition of buccal
tubes, when more lower anchorage or a soft-tissue
correction is needed, as with a thin lower lip
( Fig. 10 ). The fixed mandibular appliance is similar
to a standard lingual arch, with bands cemented
to the first molars, but with 3mm "shoulders"
bent mesial to the bands ( Fig. 11 ). The bands
should preferably be .010", instead of the
usual .007", to avoid splitting. Appliance Construction Prefabricated wires are used for both the
vertical springs and the expansion element, making
laboratory construction uncomplicated ([img=12]Fig.
12[/img]). The manufacturing process includes heat
treatment and stress relief to avoid fatigue fractures.
Adjustment is simple, usually involving
only a width modification, and different sizes are
available if needed.
Good, well-extended alginate impressions
are required, along with a hard wax bite in centric
occlusion. The lower impression tray should
be extended lingually with soft wax to obtain the
full depth of the sulcus, and the patient should be
instructed to lift and move the tongue to trim the
impression. It is important not to overextend the
lower appliance, as this will cause discomfort. If
a fixed lingual arch is used, the molar bands
should be placed first, then transferred to the
impression and secured with sticky wax. In most cases, it is not necessary to provide
a construction bite for the technician. The models
are simply marked with centric occlusion and
do not require mounting on an articulator. The
extent of initial forward activation is generally
4mm from centric, and this measurement is readily
transferred to the lower model during the
standardized construction process to mark the
position for the "shoulders" on the lower appliance.
The laboratory prescription should indicate
the retention desired and any additions such as
tooth-moving springs, capping of the lower
incisors, or a lip bumper. Appliance DeliveryThe upper and lower parts are held together
to confirm that the vertical springs have been
correctly adjusted for lateral width. The fitting
surfaces are checked to make sure there are no
undercuts or irregularities to interfere with comfort.
The lower appliance is tried in the mouth
and adjusted if necessary, or the lower lingual
arch is cemented into place. When the upper
component is inserted, the patient should automatically
close comfortably into the protrusive
position, in response to the action of the vertical
springs. Full-time wear is recommended, except
during eating and athletics. Maxillary expansion is provided by pulling
the two halves of the upper appliance 2-3mm
apart. Adjustment can be parallel, with expansion
of the canines as well as the molars, or asymmetrical,
with more posterior expansion. Reactivation
can be performed as necessary. Some lateral
adjustment of the vertical springs may be
required as the maxillary arch widens to avoid
making the appliance unwearable or fracturing a
vertical spring. If a headgear is to be worn, it can also be
delivered at the first visit. It is usually best, however,
to postpone headgear use for a week or two,
giving the patient time to adapt to the intraoral
appliance. Mandibular brackets can be bonded with a
fixed lingual arch in place, so that leveling and
alignment can be carried out during the orthopedic
phase ( Fig. 13 ). This can save considerable
time during the second stage of treatment, and
active intrusion of the lower incisors may be
helpful in avoiding an increase in lower facial
height. The option of fixing the maxillary component
in place is presently under consideration. Progressive Advancement of the MandibleThe patient's maximum mandibular protrusion
(reverse overjet 15 ) should be noted initially
so that future growth can be accurately assessed.
Progressive advancement of the mandible is carried
out in small increments, 1,2,5,6 rather than one
large activation. This encourages a maximum
rate of growth, keeps the musculature supporting
the mandible unstressed for patient comfort, and,
by applying less force to the lower dentition at
any one time, results in less undesirable dental
movement. 16 A forward shift of the mandibular
dentition, on the other hand, reduces the potential
mandibular skeletal correction and generally produces
less improvement in facial esthetics. About 1-1.5mm of change can be anticipated
every six to eight weeks, assuming reasonable
growth and proper appliance wear. At each
appointment, the vertical springs are easily adjusted
at the chair, using ordinary orthodontic
pliers, to maintain the forward position of the
mandible. The anterior leg of each spring is gently
moved forward 2mm, then the posterior leg is
adjusted forward to keep the slope of the anterior
leg the same as before ( Fig. 14 ). The slope is
checked by sighting across the appliance to the
unadjusted spring. An alternative method--adding
acrylic to the "shoulders" of the removable
lower appliance--is more time-consuming. As the patient develops an avoidance reflex
to the springs, he or she will frequently be unaware
that reactivation has taken place. The
appliance should not be reactivated again, however,
until further growth has occurred. When the
patient habitually holds the mandible well forward
of contact with the springs, it may be feasible
to dispense with daytime wear of the mandibular
removable appliance. ConclusionThe Dynamax system can be used to correct
the skeletal Class II malocclusion efficiently
and predictably at any stage in the dental development
of a growing patient ( Figs. 15 and 16 ). Laboratory
construction, appliance delivery, and
reactivation are simple and rapid procedures. The
appliance is robust, comfortable, and unobtrusive,
and interferes minimally with speech. Placing the protrusive mechanism at the
sides of the teeth avoids occlusal interference
and an unplanned increase in lower facial height.
Posterior tooth contact is maintained throughout
the orthopedic phase, allowing a well-coordinated and integrated dentition to develop and improving the transition to second-phase fixed appliance treatment.
References
VOLUME 37 : NUMBER 05 : PAGES (268-277) 2003
|
|
 |
|
1
|
Bass, N.M.: Dento-facial orthopaedics in the correction of Class II malocclusion, Br. J. Orthod. 9:3-31, 1982.
|
|
2
|
Bass, N.M.: Orthopedic coordination of dentofacial development in skeletal Class II malocclusion in conjunction with edgewise therapy, Parts I and II, Am. J. Orthod. 84:361-383, 466-490, 1983.
|
|
3
|
Clark,W.J.: The Twin Block traction technique, Eur. J. Orthod. 4:129-138, 1982.
|
|
4
|
Clark, W.J.: Twin block functional therapy, in Applications in dentofacial orthopaedics, Mosby-Wolfe, London, 1995, pp. 20-22, 76, 134.
|
|
5
|
Bass, N.M.: Bass Orthopedic Appliance System, Part I: Design and construction; Part II: Diagnosis and appliance prescription; Part III: Case management, J. Clin. Orthod. 21:254-265, 312-320, 384-394, 1987.
|
|
6
|
Bass, N.M.: Update on the Bass Appliance System, J. Clin. Orthod. 28:421-428, 1994.
|
|
7
|
Brennan, M.M. and Gianelly, A.A.: The use of the lingual arch in the mixed dentition to resolve incisor crowding, Am. J. Orthod. 117:81-85, 2000.
|
|
8
|
Bass, N.M.: Innovation in skeletal II treatment including effective incisor root torque in a preliminary removable appliance phase, Br. J. Orthod. 3:223-230, 1976.
|
|
9
|
McDonagh, S.; Moss, J.P.; Goodwin, P.; and Lee, R.T.: A prospective optical surface scanning and cephalometric assessment of the effect of functional appliances on the soft tissues, Eur. J. Orthod. 23:115-126, 2001.
|
|
10
|
Bass, N.M.: Chin support for orthopedic and functional appliances, J. Clin. Orthod. 30:110-114, 1996.
|
|
11
|
Sander, F.G.: Der Einfluss herausnehmbarer kieferortopädischer Apparate auf den Nachtschlaf der Patienten, Fortschr. Kieferorthop. 43:57-63, 1982.
|
|
12
|
Bass, N.M.: The aesthetic analysis of the face, Eur. J. Orthod. 13:343-350, 1991.
|
|
13
|
Teuscher, U.: An appraisal of growth and reaction to extraoral anchorage, Am. J. Orthod. 89:113-121, 1986.
|
|
14
|
Samuels, R. et al.: A clinical evaluation of a locking orthodontic facebow, Am. J. Orthod. 117:344-350, 2000.
|
|
15
|
Petit, H.P. and Chateau, M.: The K test and the condylar test, J. Clin. Orthod. 18:726-732, 1984.
|
|
16
|
Falck, F. and Frankel, R.: Clinical relevance of step-by-step mandibular advancement in the treatment of mandibular retrusion using the Frankel appliance, Am. J. Orthod. 96:333-341, 1989.
|
|
NEVILLE M. BASS, BDS, LDS, FDS, DOrth RCS
VOLUME 37 : NUMBER 05 : PAGES (268-277) 2003
|
|
 |
|
Dr. Neville Bass is Director of Dynamax (UK) Ltd. and in the private practice of orthodontics at 4 Queen Anne St., London W1G 9LQ, England; e-mail: drnbass@aol.com.
|
ANTON BASS, BS, BDS
VOLUME 37 : NUMBER 05 : PAGES (268-277) 2003
|
|
 |
|
Dr. Anton Bass is in the private practice of general dentistry in London.
|
|
 |