ArticleCase reports in dentistry2026
Early Protraction Facemask Followed by Fixed Appliance Therapy in a Growing Patient With Skeletal Class III Malocclusion: A Case Report.
Article in Case reports in dentistry, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Early Protraction Facemask Followed by Fixed Appliance Therapy in a Growing Patient With Skeletal Class III Malocclusion: A Case Report.Case reports in dentistry · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Skeletal Class III malocclusion remains a significant orthodontic challenge because of its multifactorial aetiology, strong genetic influence, and the unpredictability of mandibular growth. Although early protraction facemask therapy is widely advocated for maxillary deficiency, the optimal timing of intervention and long-term stability remain controversial. This report describes successful management of a growing patient with borderline skeletal Class III malocclusion using a non-expansion facemask protocol initiated beyond the conventionally recommended early treatment age. Case Presentation: A 10.5-year-old female presented with anterior crossbite, mild skeletal Class III malocclusion, maxillary retrusion and an anterolateral functional mandibular shift, with a positive family history of mandibular prognathism. Orthopaedic treatment was initiated at cervical vertebral maturation stage CS2 using a non-expansion protraction facemask protocol, followed by comprehensive non-extraction fixed appliance therapy. Intervention and Outcomes: Serial clinical and cephalometric evaluations demonstrated forward displacement of the maxilla, improvement in sagittal skeletal relationship, favourable dentoalveolar compensation, elimination of functional mandibular shift and improvement in facial profile and smile aesthetics. At treatment completion, stable Class I canine and molar relationships, positive overjet and overbite, improved facial symmetry and balanced facial proportions were achieved. Conclusion: This case highlights that biologically timed protraction facemask therapy, even when initiated beyond the conventional early age, combined with careful case selection and comprehensive fixed appliance treatment, may achieve favourable functional and aesthetic outcomes in selected growing patients with borderline skeletal Class III malocclusion.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.