Àá½Ã¸¸ ±â´Ù·Á ÁÖ¼¼¿ä. ·ÎµùÁßÀÔ´Ï´Ù.

¼±Ãµ¼º Ä¡¾Æ°á¼Õ ¹× ¸Åº¹À» µ¿¹ÝÇÑ ¼ºÀå±â ȯÀÚÀÇ °£Á¢ °ñ°Ý¼º °íÁ¤¿øÀ» ÀÌ¿ëÇÑ ±¸Ä¡ Àü¹æ °ßÀÎ Ä¡Çè·Ê

Molar Protraction Using Mini-Implant Indirect Skeletal Anchorage in a Growing Patient with Congenital Missing and Impaction

´ëÇÑÄ¡°ú±³Á¤ÇÐȸ ÀÓ»óÀú³Î 2019³â 9±Ç 4È£ p.259 ~ 269
±è¼ö¿µ, ±è¹ÎÁö, ÀüÀ±½Ä,
¼Ò¼Ó »ó¼¼Á¤º¸
±è¼ö¿µ ( Kim Soo-Young ) - ÀÌÈ­¿©ÀÚ´ëÇб³ ÀÇ°ú´ëÇкμӸñµ¿º´¿ø Ä¡°ú±³Á¤°ú
±è¹ÎÁö ( Kim Min-Ji ) - ÀÌÈ­¿©ÀÚ´ëÇб³ ÀÇ°ú´ëÇкμӸñµ¿º´¿ø Ä¡°ú±³Á¤°ú
ÀüÀ±½Ä ( Chun Youn-Sic ) - ÀÌÈ­¿©ÀÚ´ëÇб³ ÀÇ°ú´ëÇкμӸñµ¿º´¿ø Ä¡°ú±³Á¤°ú

Abstract


This case report describes a successful molar protraction treatment using mini-implant indirect skeletal anchorage in
a growing patient with congenital missing and impaction of second premolars. A 11-years-old female patient showing
skeletal Class I malocclusion with congenital missing of mandibular second premolars and horizontal impaction of a
maxillary left second premolar visited our clinic. After extraction of the remained primary second molars and impacted
maxillary left second premolar, the maxillary left first molar was mesially drifted. However, since the extraction space
was not completely closed, mandibular first molars were protracted by using mini-implant as an indirect skeletal
anchorage. After the protraction of mandibular first molars, fixed orthodontic appliances were bonded. Overall treatment
was completed in 24 months and mandibular molars were successfully protracted with the increase of alveolar bone
width, less buccal bone dehiscence, and no root resorption. Therefore, molar protraction using mini-implant indirect
skeletal anchorage could be a good orthodontic treatment option to replace the missing premolars in growing patients.

Å°¿öµå

Molar protraction; Mini-implant; Indirect skeletal anchorage; Growing patient; Congenital missing

¿ø¹® ¹× ¸µÅ©¾Æ¿ô Á¤º¸

µîÀçÀú³Î Á¤º¸