Skeletal class III correction in growing patient with bone anchorage: Case Report
Main Article Content
Background: Skeletal class III is a dentofacial deformity where the lower third of face is more prominent. The treatment is decided according to the etiology and age of the patient; If the patient is in growing, the malformation can be treated with an interceptive protocol and if possible, avoid a orthognathic surgery in the future.
Objective: Improve the skeletal class, uncross the bite or obtain an edge-to-edge bite, improve the position of the upper lip and evaluate the initial-final relationship of ANS and ANB.
Case report: 13-year-old male patient, with no reported pathological or family history; presents skeletal class III, vertical growth, molar class I and canine III; he was treated with the protocol of mini BAMP (bone anchored maxillary protraction) plates, intermaxillary elastics and a palate with flat tracks.
Results: The orthopedic phase lasted five months and an edge-to-edge bite and skeletal class I were achieved.
Discussion: Results were obtained with the use of mini implants without extraoral anchorage in less time compared to other methods that have to be used for 9-12 months.
Conclusion: The BAMP protocol can be used in growing patients without a face mask to correct skeletal class III.
Espinar-Escalona E, Ruiz-Navarro MB, Ortega-Rivera H, Llamas-Carreras JM, Barrera-Mora JM, Solano-Reina JE. Tratamiento temprano de las Clases III. Rev Esp Ortod. 2011;41:79–89.
Ramírez-Mendoza J, Muñoz-Martínez C, Gallegos-Ramírez A, Rueda-Ventura MA. Maloclusión clase III. Salud en Tabasco. 2010;944–50.
Reyes-Ramírez DL, Etcheverry-Doger E, Antón-Sarabia J, Muñoz-Quintana G. Asociación de maloclusiones clase I, II y III y su tratamiento en población infantil en la ciudad de Puebla, México. Revista Tamé. 2014;2(6):175–9.
Zere E, Chaudhari PK, Sharan J, Dhingra K, Tiwari N. Developing Class III malocclusions: Challenges and solutions. Clin Cosmet Investig Dent. 2018;10:99–116.
Clemente R, Contardo L, Greco C, Di Lenarda R, Perinetti G. Class III Treatment with Skeletal and Dental Anchorage: A Review of Comparative Effects. Biomed Res Int. 2018;2018:1–10.
D’Escriván de Saturno L. Ortodoncia en dentición mixta. 2da Edició. Orthodontics WJ of, editor. Venezuela: Amolca; 2007. 1–555 p.
Ngan P, Wilmes B, Drescher D, Martin C, Weaver B, Gunel E. Comparison of two maxillary protraction protocols: tooth-borne versus bone-anchored protraction facemask treatment. Prog Orthod. 2015;16(26):1–11.
Pereira da Silva HCF, de Paiva JB, Rino Neto J. Anterior crossbite treatment in the primary dentition: Three case reports. Int Orthod. 2018;16(3):514–29.
Proffit WR, Fields HW, Sarver DM, Ackerman JL. Ortodoncia Contemporánea. 5ta Edició. Elsevier, editor. España; 2013. 770 p.
Martinez Smit R, Aristizábal JF. Maloclusión Clase III : Diagnóstico y Tratamiento Ortopédico . Revisión de Literatura y Reporte de Caso. Revista Cientifica Sociedad de Ortodoncia. 2016;3(2):7–17.
De-Clerck H, Cevidanes L, Baccetti T. Dentofacial effects of bone-anchored maxillary protraction: A controlled study of consecutively treated Class III patients. J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2010;138(5):577–581.
De Clerck H, Cornelis MA, Cevidanes LH, Heymann GC, Tulloch CJF. Orthopedic Traction of the Maxilla with Miniplates: A New Perspective for Treatment of Midface Deficiency. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2009;67(10):2123–9.
Şar Ç, Arman-Özçirpici A, Uçkan S, Canan-Yazici A. Comparative evaluation of maxillary protraction with or without skeletal anchorage. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2011;139(5):636–49.
Degala S, Bhanumathi M, Shivalinga BM. Orthopaedic Protraction of the Maxilla with Miniplates: Treatment of Midface Deficiency. J Maxillofac Oral Surg. 2015;14(1):111–8.
Cornelis MA, Tepedino M, De Vos-Riis N, Niu X, Cattaneo PM. Treatment effect of bone-anchored maxillary protraction in growing patients compared to controls: a systematic review with meta-analysis. Eur J Orthod. 2020 Aug 20;1–18.
Sahin T, Delforge A, Garreau E, Raoul G, Ferri J. Orthopedic treatment of Class III malocclusions using skeletal anchorage: A bibliographical review. Int Orthod. 2016;14(3):263–72.
Mohamed-Eid O, Abdel-Fattah Ramadan A, Adel-Nadim M, Abdel-Bary-Hamed T. Maxillary protraction using orthodontic miniplates in correction of Class III malocclusion during growth. J World Fed Orthod. 2016;5(3):100–6.
Van Hevele J, Nout E, Claeys T, Meyns J, Scheerlinck J, Politis C. Bone-anchored maxillary protraction to correct a class III skeletal relationship: A multicenter retrospective analysis of 218 patients. J Cranio-Maxillofacial Surg. 2018;46(10):1800–6.
Cevidanes L, Baccetti T, Franchi L, McNamara JA, De Clerck H. Comparison of two protocols for maxillary protraction: Bone anchors versus face mask with rapid maxillary expansion. Angle Orthod. 2010;80(5):799–806.
Fakharian M, Bardideh E, Abtahi M. Skeletal class iii malocclusion treatment using mandibular and maxillary skeletal anchorage and intermaxillary elastics: A case report. Dental Press J Orthod. 2019;24(5):52–9.
De Clerck H, E.B E, Swennen G-RJ. Success rate of miniplate anchorage for bone anchored maxillary protraction. Angle Orthod. 2011;81(6):1010–3.
Miranda F, Da Cunha-Bastos JC, Magno-Dos Santos A, Vieira LS, Aliaga-Del Castillo A, Janson G, et al. Miniscrew-anchored maxillary protraction in growing Class III patients. J Orthod. 2020;47(2):170–80.
Elnagar MH, Elshourbagy E, Ghobashy S, Khedr M, Evans CA. Comparative evaluation of 2 skeletally anchored maxillary protraction protocols. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop [Internet]. 2016;150(5):751–62. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2016.04.025
- David Arias, Miguel Ángel Casillas Santana, Marco Felipe Salas Orozco, Proximal enamel thickness quantification in orthodontics for interproximal reduction: A systematic review , Revista Estomatología: Vol. 30 No. 1 (2022)
- Daniela Orozco Jiménez, Alejandro Andrade Torres, Alejandra Castro García, Raul Roca Pereda, Miguel Angel Casillas Santana, Management of an orthognathic surgery treatment in a skeletal class III patient: case report. , Revista Estomatología: Vol. 29 No. 2 (2021)
- Marco Felipe Salas Orozco, Ximena Perez Zarate, Norma Veronica Zavala Alonso, Alan Martinez Zumaran, Lucia Catalina Rodriguez Gonzalez, Martin Ulises Gutierrez Martinez, Diana Leyva Del Rio, Comparative study of 3 methods of crimping in orthodontic hooks with two different types of applied force (elastomeric chains and tie-backs) – in vitro study. , Revista Estomatología: Vol. 31 No. 2 (2023)
- Ana Gabriela Magaña Lamas, Marco Felipe Salas Orozco, Alan Martínez Zumarán, Norma Verónica Zavala Alonso , Oscar Sánchez-Armass Cappello , Gylmar Mariel Cárdenas , Enrique González García , Comparison of stresses and displacements between steel and titanium mini-implants inserted with different angles: finite element analysis. , Revista Estomatología: Vol. 31 No. 2 (2023)
- Yuri Isaí Avilés Osuna, Rebeca Elizabeth Flores Ventura , Alejandro Andrade Torres , Yareli Hernández Ávila, Alberto Vinicio Jerezano Domínguez , Miguel Angel Casillas Santana, Correction of canine class II and anterior crowding with asymmetric extractions: Case Report , Revista Estomatología: Vol. 32 No. 2 (2024)
- Fernanda Montserrat Beltran Melendez, Victor Mario Fierro Serna, Alan Martinez Zumaran, Rita Elizabeth Martinez Martinez, Felipe Garcia Cruz, Ricardo Martinez Rider, Victor Emanuel Martinez Urbina, Marco Felipe Salas Orozco, Qualitative Evaluation of 3D Resin and Acrylic Occlusal Splints in the Treatment of Temporomandibular Disorders: A Pilot Study , Revista Estomatología: Vol. 33 No. 1 (2025)
Accepted 2021-07-12
Published 2021-09-15

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Los autores/as conservan los derechos de autor y ceden a la revista el derecho de la primera publicación, con el trabajo registrado con la licencia de atribución de Creative Commons, que permite a terceros utilizar lo publicado siempre que mencionen la autoría del trabajo y a la primera publicación en esta revista.