Predictive Equation for Construction of Anatomic Porion with Machine Porion as Reference Point.

AIM: The aim of the study was to find a relationship between anatomic porion (PoA) and machine porion (PoM) and to construct PoA with the help of machine porion. METHODOLOGY: About 200 pretreatment lateral roentgenic cephalograms were used for the study. Perpendicular distances of PoA and PoM were measured from Sella-Nasion (SN) plane and SN perpendicular plane. The results were tabulated. With the help of statistical analysis, predictive equation was derived to construct PoA and PoM. p-value was set at p < 0.05. RESULTS: Anatomic porion distance from SN was 24.35 ± 3.96 and from SN perpendicular was 12.89 ± 4.56. Distance of PoM from SN was 22.46 ± 4.20 and from SN perpendicular was 16.76 ± 4.89. Sexual dimorphism was also seen. CONCLUSION: There is a relationship between the PoM and PoA, thus, PoA, which is more reliable, can be constructed with the help of PoM, which is easy to reproduce. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: To overcome the inherent limitations of PoA and PoM, the present study aimed to find a relationship between the two so as to easily construct PoA that is more reliable while taking advantage of the ease of reproducibility of PoM.

Bone-anchored maxillary protraction (BAMP): A review.

INTRODUCTION: Protraction therapy for maxillary deficiency in the treatment of skeletal class III malocclusion involves the use of facemask. Conventionally facemask has been anchored to the maxillary dentition, which is responsible for some of the counter-productive effects of facemask therapy including backward and downward rotation of the chin, increase in the lower anterior facial height, proclination of maxillary incisors, retroclination of mandibular incisors apart from mesialization of maxillary molars with extrusion and decreased overbite. AIM: The aim of this article is to highlight the nuances of Bone-Anchored Maxillary Protraction (BAMP) including a literature review, which is comprehensive and narrative and comparing the different techniques involved such as type 1 BAMP versus type 2 BAMP and BAMP versus facemask. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A computerized search was performed in electronic databases such as PubMed, PubMed Central, Cochrane, Embase, DOAJ, and Google scholar using key words such as "bone-anchored maxillary protraction" and "BAMP." The search was confined to articles in English published till March 2021. Forty-seven case-controlled, cross-sectional, retrospective and prospective studies, as well as systematic reviews and meta-analysis were included in this article, which were limited to human subjects. A hand search of the reference lists of the included articles was also carried out to include missed out articles. CONCLUSION: To overcome these drawbacks, BAMP was introduced, which causes both maxillary protraction, restraint of mandibular growth with minimal dentoalveolar changes. BAMP is used widely nowadays in the treatment of skeletal class III malocclusion.