Perbedaan analisis jaringan lunak sebelum dan setelah perawatan ortodonti kamuflase pada maloklusi skeletal kelas II divisi 1 berdasarkan analisis MC Namara: studi komparatif

Diandra Audyla Miranti; Endah Mardiati; Ida Ayu Evangelina; Avi Laviana

doi:10.24198/pjdrs.v7i2.35884

Perbedaan analisis jaringan lunak sebelum dan setelah perawatan ortodonti kamuflase pada maloklusi skeletal kelas II divisi 1 berdasarkan analisis MC Namara: studi komparatif

Diandra Audyla Miranti, Endah Mardiati, Ida Ayu Evangelina, Avi Laviana

Abstract

ABSTRAK

Pendahuluan: Perawatan ortodonti kamuflase maloklusi kelas II divisi 1 dilakukan pada pasien yang sudah tidak mungkin dirawat dengan alat ortodonti fungsional tetapi masih mungkin dilakukan dengan perawatan ortodonti kamuflase. Salah satu cara evaluasi hasil perawatan ortodonti kamuflase maloklusi skeletal kelas II divisi 1, dilakukan dengan analisis sefalometri McNamara secara manual. Tujuan penelitian menganalisis perbedaan hasil analisa sefalometri jaringan lunak metode McNamara sebelum dan setelah perawatan kamuflase maloklusi skeletal kelas II divisi I Metode: Jenis penelitian cross sectional analitik komparatif. Penentuan sampel dilakukan secara purposive sampling, diperoleh 11 sampel. Analisis sefalometri McNamara menggunakan Frankfort Horizontal Plane sebagai referensi horizontal dan menentukan garis tegak lurus melalui Nasion sebagai referensi vertikal. Analisis statistik dilakukan dengan uji pairedt-test (p<0,05). Hasil: Terdapat perbedaan signifikan hasil analisis jaringan lunak sudut nasolabial, cant bibir atas, dan hubungan insisif rahang atas terhadap titik A-Pog (p<0,05). Tidak terdapat perbedaan signifikan analisis titik A ke N perpendicular, condylion ke titik A, condylion ke titik gnation, LAFH, mandibular plane angle, facial axis angle, jarak pogonion ke N perpendicular, dan jarak gigi insisif rahang bawah ke titik A-Pog (p>0,05). Simpulan: Perawatan ortodonti kamuflase pada maloklusi skeletal kelas II divisi 1 menghasilkan perubahan jaringan lunak sudut nasolabial, cant bibir atas, dan jarak insisif terhadap titik A. Titik A ke N perpendicular, condylion ke titik A, condylion ke titik gnation, LAFH, mandibular plane angle, facial axis angle, jarak pogonion ke N perpendicular, sedangkan jarak gigi insisif rahang bawah ke titik A-Pog tidak mengalami perubahan.

KATA KUNCI: Maloklusi skeletal, kelas II divisi 1, ortodonti kamuflase, analisis sefalometri jaringan lunak, McNamara.

The difference in soft tissue analysis before and after camouflage orthodontic treatment in Class II Division 1 skeletal malocclusion based on MC Namara analysis: comparative study

ABSTRACT

Introduction: The camouflage treatment of Class II division 1 malocclusion was performed on patients who are no longer able to be treated with functional orthodontic devices but it is still possible to be treated with orthodontic camouflage treatment. One of the possible methods to evaluate the results of orthodontic camouflage treatment of class II division 1 skeletal malocclusion was done by manual McNamara cephalometric analysis. The aim of the study was to determine the difference before and after orthodontic camouflage treatment of class II division 1 malocclusion using manual McNamara cephalometric analysis. Methods: This research is cross sectional comparative analytic. Determination of the sample was done by purposive sampling, which obtained 11 samples. McNamara's cephalometric analysis uses the Frankfort Horizontal Plane as a horizontal reference and determines a perpendicular line through the Nasion as a vertical reference. Statistical analysis was performed by t-test (p<0.05)t. Results: There were significant differences in the results of soft tissue analysis of the nasolabial angle, upper lip cant, and the distance of the maxillary incisors to the A-Pog point (p<0.05). There were no significant differences in analysis of point A to N perpendicular, condylion to point A , condylion to point of gnation, LAFH, mandibular plane angle, facial axis angle, pogonion distance to N perpendicular, and mandibular incisor distance to point A-Pog (p >0.05). Conclusions:Orthodontic camouflage treatment of skeletal class II division 1 malocclusion results in changes in the soft tissue of the nasolabial angle, upper lip cant, and the distance of the maxillary incisors to the A-Pog point. While point A to N perpendicular, condylion to point A, condylion to point of gnation, LAFH, mandibular plane angle, facial axis angle, pogonion distance to N perpendicular, and the distance of the mandibular incisor to the A-Pog point did not change.

KEY WORDS: Skeletal malocclusion, Class II division 1, orthodontic camouflage treatment, mcnamara cephalometric analysis.

Keywords

Maloklusi skeletal, kelas II divisi 1, ortodonti kamuflase, analisis sefalometri jaringan lunak, McNamara, Skeletal malocclusion, Class II division 1, orthodontic camouflage treatment, mcnamara cephalometric analysis.

Full Text:

PDF

References

DAFTAR PUSTAKA

Hassan A.H. Cephalometric characteristics of Class II division 1 malocclusion in a Saudi population living in the western region. Saudi Dent J. 2011 Jan; 23(1): 23–27. Published online 2010 Nov 2. DOI: 10.1016/j.sdentj.2010.10.001.

Selvarani R. Cephalometric Norms using McNamara Analysis in Tamilnadu Young Adults. Masters thesis, Tamilnadu Government Dental College and Hospital, Chennai. [Dissertation]. Medical University; Tamilnadu. 2011. 454-45

Chengke L, Liu S, Liu Q, Zhang B, Li Z. Norms of McNamara’s Cephalometric Analysis on Lateral View of 3D CT Imaging in Adults from Northeast China. Journal of Hard Tissue Biology. 2014; 23 (2):249-54. DOI: 10.2485/jhtb.23.249.

Hlongwa P. Cephalometric analysis : manual tracing of a lateral cephalogram. S Afr Dent J. 2019; 74(7):389–393. DOI: 10.17159/2519-0105/2019/v74no7a6.

Kusmanto. Perbandingan Profil Wajah Jaringan Keras dan Jaringan Lunak antara Laki-laki dan Perempuan Deutro Melayu. Fakultas Kedokteran Gigi UGM. Karya Ilmiah Akhir. 2014. Jul 20 [disitasi 2023 Jun 28].

Nainggolan HJ, Prihandini IWS, Soehardono D. Perbandingan perubahan kecembungan wajah antara jaringan keras dan lunak pada perawatan maloklusi angle klas II divisi 1. Ked Gigi. 2014; 5:1-6.

Wanjau J, Khan M, Sethusa MPS. Applicability of the McNamara analysis in a sample of adult Black South Africans. South African Dental Journal. 2019; 74(2): 87-92. DOI: 10.17159/2519-0105/2019/v74no2a6.

Agustina D, Suparwitri S. Perawatan Kamuflase Maloklusi Klas III Dentoskeletal Menggunakan Teknik Begg Pada Pasien Dewasa. Majalah Kedokteran Gigi Klinik. 2015; 1(2):116-121. DOI: 10.22146/mkgk.11979.

Naragond A, Kenganal S, Sagarkar R, Sugaradday. Orthodontic Camouflage Treatment in An Adult Patient With Class II, Division I Malocclusion. Journal of Clinical & Diagnostic Research. 2013; 7(2):395-400. DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2013/5191.2780,

Laksmihadia TD, Siregar E. Class II Division 1 Malocclusion With Deep Curve Of Spee And Lower Second Premolar Linguo Version. Jurnal PDGI. 2015; 64(1): 17-24.

Mardiati E, Komara I, Halim H, Maskoen AM. Determination of Pubertal Growth Plot Using Hand-wrist and Cervical Vertebrae Maturation Indices, Dental Calcification, Peak Height Velocity, and Menarche. Open Dent J. 2021 Jun 10;15:228–40. DOI: 10.2174/187421060211501228.

Mardiati E, Soemantri ES, Halim H. Determination of the duration of various pubertal growth stages in Indonesian boys and girls using hand-wrist radiographs. J World Fed Orthod. 2018; 7(4):146–9. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejwf.2018.10.003.

Kurnia D, Harnimastuti Y. Effect Of I-McNAMARA Line Distance Change To Laterally Lips Convexity On Class II Division 1 Malocclusion Treated By Begg Appliance (Lateral Cephalogram Studies). Majalah Ortodontik . 2016;1:1–5.

Karunia D, Harnimastuti Y. Effect Of I-Mcnamara Line Distance Change To Laterally Lips Convexity On Class II Division 1 Malocclusion Treated By Begg Appliance (Lateral Cephalogram Studies ). Majalah Ortodontik. 2016; 1–57.

Seben MP, Valarelli FP, Freitas KMP, Cancado RH, Neto ACB. Cephalomnetric changes in Class II division 1 Patients Treated with Two Maxillary Premolars Extraction. Dental Press J.Orthod. 2013; 18(4):61-9. DOI: 10.1590/s2176-94512013000400010.

Soegiharto EP, Evangelina IA, Mardiati E, Laviana A. Perbedaan hasil analisis sefalometri MC Namara sebelum dan sesudah perawatan maloklusi kelas I Protrusif bimaksiler. 2023; 7(1): 25-9. DOI: 10.24198/pjdrs.v7i1.35816

Alkadhi RM, Finkelman MD, Trotman CA, Lanavakis G. The Role of Lip Thickness in Upper Lip Response to Sagital Change of Incisor Position. Orthodotic & Craniofacial Research. 2018; 22(1): 53-57. DOI: 10.1111/ocr.12257.

Hartono D, Anggani H, Karniati M. Evaluasi Posisi Maksila dan Mandibula Secara Sefalometrik Setelah Perawatan Ortodonti Cekat Berdasarkan Analisis Steiner dan McNAMARA. Jurnal Kedokteran Gigi Universitas Indonesia. 2013; 1(10): 216–22.

Wardojo HP, Laviana A, Evangelina IA, Mardiati E. Perbandingan tingkat kepuasan pasien terhadap hasil perawatan ortodonti ekstraksi dan non ekstraksi berdasarkan modifikasi Boston Orthodontic Society. 2022; 34(1): 27-33. DOI: 10.24198/jkg.v34i1.34080

Jacobson A. Radiographic Cephalometry from Basics to Video-imaging. 1st Ed. Chicago: Quintessence Publishing Co Inc; 1995. p.113-123.

Al-Nimri KS. Vertical Changes in Class II division 1 Malocclusion after Premolar Extractions. Angle Orthodontist. 2006; 76(1):52. DOI: 10.1043/0003-3219(2006)076[0052:VCICID]2.0.CO;2.

50. Kusnoto, J. & Kusnoto, H. The effect of anterior tooth retraction on lip position of orthodontically treated adult Indonesians. Am. J. Orthod. Dentofacial Orthop. 2001; 120(3):304–307. DOI: 10.1067/mod.2001.116089

Verma S.L, Sharma V.P,2 Singh G P, Kiran Sachan K. Comparative assessment of soft-tissue changes in Class II Division 1 patients following extraction and non-extraction treatment. Dent Res J (Isfahan). 2013; 10(6): 764–71.

Littlewood S. J., Mitchell, Laura. An Introduction to Orthodontics. 5th Ed. Oxford University Press; 2019. p.2-9.

Prima F, Iman P, Sutantyo. Effect of i-McNamara line distance change to laterally lips convexity on class ii division 1 malocclusion treated by begg appliance (lateral cephalogram studies). Jurnal PDGI. 2015; 64 (1):17-24.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.24198/pjdrs.v7i2.35884