BR202015010376U2

BR202015010376U2 - bone growth stimulation device for treatment of skeletal class II for lack of mandibular growth

Info

Publication number: BR202015010376U2
Application number: BR202015010376U
Authority: BR
Inventors: Rosa Carrieri Rossi
Original assignee: Rosa Carrieri Rossi
Priority date: 2015-05-07
Filing date: 2015-05-07
Publication date: 2016-11-08

Abstract

dispositivo de estímulo do crescimento ósseo para o tratamento da classe ii esquelética por falta de crescimento mandibular. a presente patente de modelo de utilidade, diz respeito a dispositivo de estímulo do crescimento ósseo para o tratamento da classe ii esquelética por falta de crescimento mandibular o qual se refere a aparelho ortopédico funcional que visa promover o aumento do comprimento e altura do osso mandibular em indivíduos portadores de má oclusão de classe ii , o qual consiste em dispositivo formado por duas placas de resina acrílica (5) autopolimerizável apoiadas no arco madibular e no palato; estas duas placas (5) são conectadas por um fio de aço inoxidável de 1,2 mm de diâmetro denominado arco dorsal (4), sendo que na parte superior, que se apoia no palato, são inseridos outros dois acessórios, o arco vestibular (3) de aço inoxidável com 0,8 mm de diâmetro e a mola cofim (2), de fio 1,2 mm de diâmetro, que pode ser substituído por um parafuso expansor de aço encontrado no comércio de produtos ortodônticos; no arco inferior, dois conectores de fio de aço inoxidável de 0,8mm de diâmetro passam da face interna do rebordo alveolar por distal dos caninos inferiores até a face vestibular, onde uma placa de acrílico (5) quimicamente ativado se extende até a mesial do canino oposto, onde se liga ao outro conector (8); pode ser instalado um parafuso expansor de aço na face interna da placa acrílica, de acordo com as necessidades individuais de cada paciente; resina acrílica, fios de aço inoxidável e outros materiais, adereços e acessórios utilizados na confecção do aparelho podem ser de qualquer cor e/ou qualquer marca comercial encontradas no mercado (nacional ou externo) ou que vierem a ser fabricadas com as mesmas características e indicações.bone growth stimulation device for the treatment of skeletal class II for lack of mandibular growth. The present utility model patent relates to a bone growth stimulation device for the treatment of skeletal class II due to lack of mandibular growth which refers to a functional orthopedic device which aims to increase the length and height of the mandibular bone in individuals with class II malocclusion, which consists of a device formed by two self-curing acrylic resin (5) plates supported on the madibular arch and palate; These two plates (5) are connected by a 1.2 mm diameter stainless steel wire called the dorsal arch (4), and on the upper part, which rests on the palate, two other accessories are inserted, the buccal arch ( 3) 0.8 mm diameter stainless steel and 1.2 mm diameter cushion spring (2), which can be replaced by a steel expansion screw found in the orthodontic trade; at the lower arch, two 0.8mm diameter stainless steel wire connectors pass from the inner face of the alveolar ridge distal to the lower canines to the buccal face, where a chemically activated acrylic plate (5) extends to the mesial of the lower canine. opposite canine, where it connects to the other connector (8); A steel expansion bolt can be installed on the inner face of the acrylic plate, according to the individual needs of each patient; acrylic resin, stainless steel wire and other materials, props and accessories used in the manufacture of the appliance may be of any color and / or any trademark found on the market (domestic or foreign) or manufactured with the same characteristics and indications. .

Description

“DISPOSITIVO DE ESTÍMULO DO CRESCIMENTO ÓSSEO PARA O TRATAMENTO DA CLASSE II ESQUELÉTICA POR FALTA DE CRESCIMENTO MANDIBULAR” L- INTRODUÇÃO 001 A presente patente de Modelo de Utilidade diz respeito a Dispositivo de Estímulo do Crescimento Ósseo para o Tratamento da Classe II Esquelética por Falta de Crescimento Mandibular utilizado na ortodontia e na Ortopedia Funcional dos Maxilares, especialidades que atuam na correção e prevenção das desarmonias entre os arcos dentários e suas bases ósseas.Quando o maxilar superior (maxila) está posicionada à frente do maxilar inferior (mandíbula) o paciente apresenta má oclusão de Classe II. Esta má oclusão pode ser causada por problemas esqueléticos, dentários, funcionais e, mais frequentemente, por uma combinação das anteriores. 002 O tratamento da Classe II pode ser feito com ativadores de crescimento mandibular (ortopedia funcional dos maxilares), com ancoragem extrabucal (ortopedia mecânica), com a combinação de ambos, com distalizadores de molares, com ortodontia corretiva mediante extrações ou não e pela cirurgia ortognática1219'21'22'. Todas têm igual importância, o que importa é a causa da Classe II, a idade do paciente e a opinião do paciente e de seus responsáveis sobre o tipo de tratamento proposto25’43.“BONE GROWTH STIMULATION DEVICE FOR TREATMENT OF MANDIBULAR GROWTH SKONE CLASS II” L- INTRODUCTION 001 This Utility Model patent relates to Bone Growth Stimulation Device for the Treatment of Skeletal Class II Failure Mandibular Growth used in Orthodontics and Functional Orthopedics of the Jaws, specialties that act in the correction and prevention of disharmonies between the dental arches and their bone bases. When the upper jaw is positioned in front of the lower jaw, the patient presents Class II malocclusion. This malocclusion may be caused by skeletal, dental, functional and, more often, a combination of the above. Class II treatment can be done with mandibular growth activators (functional jaw orthopedics), extraoral anchorage (mechanical orthopedics), the combination of both, with molar distalizers, with corrective orthodontics by extractions or not and by surgery. orthognathic 1219'21'22 '. All are equally important, what matters is the cause of the Class II, the age of the patient and the opinion of the patient and their guardians about the proposed treatment25 '43.

2, - FINALIDADE 003 A finalidade deste Dispositivo de Estímulo do Crescimento Ósseo para o Tratamento da Classe II Esquelética por Falta de Crescimento Mandibular utilizado na ortodontia e na Ortopedia Funcional dos Maxilares, conforme seu próprio nome o diz, refere-se a correção e prevenção das desarmonias entre os arcos dentários e suas bases ósseas.2, - PURPOSE 003 The purpose of this Bone Growth Stimulus Device for the Treatment of Skeletal Class II for Lack of Mandibular Growth used in Orthodontics and Functional Orthopedics of the Jaws, as its name implies, refers to correction and prevention. of the disharmonies between the dental arches and their bone bases.

3, - CAMPO DE APLICAÇÃO 004 O campo de aplicação deste dispositivo refere-se à área da Odontologia mais especificamente nas especialidades da ortodontia e na Ortopedia Funcional dos Maxilares.3, - FIELD OF APPLICATION 004 The field of application of this device refers to the field of dentistry more specifically in the specialties of orthodontics and functional orthopedics of the jaws.

4, - ESTADO DA TÉCNICA 005 Estudos prévios conduzidos em animais de laboratório6·17’24·30’33·34·35'47 e em humanos7·8’9’10’14·16’18·26·27’28·38’39’40’41 indicam que o tratamento precoce da Classe II esquelética por deficiência de crescimento mandibular pode ser feito com aparelhos ortopédicos funcionais chamados genericamente de ativadores de crescimento. 006 Embora estes estudos ainda resultem em controvérsia quanto à efetividade da terapia em relação a outras manobras clinicas alguns autores advogam que o tratamento precoce pode contribuir tanto para minimizar as consequências o crescimento alterado como também para melhorar a condição psicosocial dos pacientes32'46. 007 Neste contexto se encaixam todos os aparelhos montados na mordida construtiva29'32, inclusive os aparelhos fixos do tipo Herbst. 008 Visando a colocação no mercado de um produto e respectivo sistema de fabricação, dotados de características próprias de desenvolvimento, pesquisas de anterioridades foram realizadas no Banco de Dados do INPI e foram encontrados os seguintes processos: 5, - AVANÇO TECNOLOGICO 009 Dentre as principais características técnicas apresentadas pelo Dispositivo de Estímulo do Crescimento Ósseo para o Tratamento da Classe II Esquelética por Falta de Crescimento Mandibular destacam-se as seguintes: 010 - O tratamento da Classe II pode ser feito com ativadores de crescimento mandibular (ortopedia funcional dos maxilares), com ancoragem extrabucal (ortopedia mecânica), com a combinação de ambos, com distalizadores de molares, com ortodontia corretiva mediante extrações ou não e pela cirurgia ortognática12’19-21'22'. Todas têm igual importância, o que importa é a causa da Classe II, a idade do paciente e a opinião do paciente e de seus responsáveis sobre o tipo de tratamento proposto2:i’4\ 011 - Os ativadores de crescimento mandibular provocam alongamento do comprimento mandibular, restrição de crescimento do terço médio, avanço do arco alveloar inferior, restrição de avanço do arco alveolar superior (efeito extrabucal), labioversão dos incisivos inferiores, linguoversão dos incisivos superiores e extrusão dos molares inferiores1'll 26.4, - STATE OF THE ART 005 Preliminary studies conducted on laboratory animals6 · 17'24 · 30'33 · 34 · 35'47 and in humans7 · 8'9'10'14 · 16'18 · 26 · 27'28 · 38'39'40'41 indicate that early skeletal Class II treatment for mandibular growth deficiency can be done with functional orthopedic appliances called generically growth activators. Although these studies still result in controversy as to the effectiveness of therapy in relation to other clinical maneuvers, some authors argue that early treatment can contribute both to minimize the consequences of altered growth and to improve patients' psychosocial condition32'46. 007 In this context, all devices mounted on the constructional bite 29'32, including Herbst-type fixed appliances, fit together. Aiming at placing a product and its manufacturing system on the market, with its own development characteristics, previous research was carried out in the INPI Database and the following processes were found: 5, - TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANCEMENT 009 Among the main characteristics The techniques presented by the Bone Growth Stimulation Device for the Treatment of Skeletal Class II due to Mandibular Growth Failure include: 010 - Class II treatment can be performed with mandibular growth activators (functional jaw orthopedics). extraoral anchorage (mechanical orthopedics), with the combination of both, with molar distalizers, corrective orthodontics with or without extractions and orthognathic surgery12'19-21'22 '. All are equally important, what matters is the cause of Class II, the age of the patient, and the opinion of the patient and their carers about the proposed treatment type2: i'4 \ 011 - Mandibular growth activators cause lengthening mandibular, middle third growth restriction, lower alveloar arch advancement, upper alveolar arch advancement restriction (extraoral effect), lower incisor labioversion, upper incisor linguoversion, and lower molar extrusion1'll 26.

6.- DESCRIÇÃO DAS FIGURAS 012 Para se obter uma total e completa visualização de como é constituído o Dispositivo de Estímulo do Crescimento Ósseo para o Tratamento da Classe II Esquelética por Falta de Crescimento Mandibular , ora em questão e objeto de presente patente de Modelo de Utilidade, acompanham as figuras em anexo, aos quais se faz referências conforme ilustrado nas Figuras 1 e 2 da parte superior e nas Figuras 3, 4 e 5 da parte inferior.6.- DESCRIPTION OF THE FIGURES 012 For a complete and complete view of what the Bone Growth Stimulus Device for the Treatment of Skeletal Class II for Mandibular Growth Failure is constituted herein is the subject of this Patent Model. Usefulness is attached to the accompanying figures, to which reference is made as shown in Figures 1 and 2 at the top and Figures 3, 4 and 5 at the bottom.

Figura 1: Ilustra que a posição tanto da mola Coffin como do parafuso expansor é a mesma, a parte mais profunda do palato.Figure 1: Illustrates that the position of both the Coffin spring and the expander screw are the same, the deepest part of the palate.

Figura 2: mostra a posição do arco vestibular em relação aos incisivos superiores.Figure 2: shows the position of the buccal arch in relation to the maxillary incisors.

Figura 3: Apoio da placa labioativa: Figura 4: Ilustra a placa bipartida passagem do apoio para vestibular e a retenção na parte vestibular, que não encosta no gesso e nem fica muito distante.Figure 3: Lip plate support: Figure 4: Illustrates the split plate passage of the vestibular support and retention in the buccal part, which does not touch the plaster and is not too far away.

Figura 5: Mostra a parte inferior do dispositivo e sua conexão com a parte superior.Figure 5: Shows the bottom of the device and its connection to the top.

8,- DESCRIÇÃO DA INVENÇÃO 013 A presente patente de Modelo de Utilidade diz respeito a Dispositivo de Estímulo do Crescimento Ósseo para o Tratamento da Classe II Esquelética por Falta de Crescimento Mandibular , (1) tem como objetivo oferecer um Dispositivo com as seguintes configurações : 014 Como forma de padronizar esta posição, conforme ilustrado na figura 1 usa-se o espaço entre a mesial dos primeiros molares decíduos (ou primeiros premolares, se o paciente os tiver) e a distai dos segundos molares decíduos (ou segundos premolares). 015 A mola Coffin (2) deve ser feita com fio 1,2 mm. Caso seja preciso instalar um parafuso, será colocado na mesma posição que a Coffin (2). 016 O arco vestibular (3) (figura 2) pode ser passivo, com a finalidade de facilitar a adaptação do aparelho na mordida construtiva ou ativo, quando se pretende inclinar os incisivos superiores para palatino. Usamos basicamente o arco de Hawley. 017 A placa labioativa (6) (figura 3) pode ser contínua (feita em uma parte de acrílico, somente) ou bipartida. 018 A placa bipartida (Figura 4) é usada quando se projeta um expansor na parte inferior, a fim de permitir a abertura do aparelho. 019 Tanto uma como a outra (fio 0,8mm) iniciam por uma retenção na parte lingual, que nunca pode tocar no gesso e nem ficar muito distante do mesmo, para facilitar a acrilização 020 Quando a placa é bipartida é necessário fazer a alça de ativação (7). A alça de ativação (7) é uma simples alça com duas retenções (8), uma para cada lado. Chamamos a atenção para que todas as retenções (8) fiquem posicionadas mais ou menos no meio do desenho da placa labioativa (6) para permitir que possa ser feito um Arco dorsal (4). 021 O arco dorsal (4) é uma peça que tem a responsabilidade de conectar as duas partes do aparelho e manter a mordida construtiva, deve ser feita com fio l,2mm de espessura para evitar que quebre facilmente. 022 Inicia-se a retenção da parte inferior, conforme visto na figura 4. Esta retenção não deve ficar nem muito baixa e nem perto da cervical, para facilitar a acrilização. 023 Após a saída da resina é feita uma alça (7) que servirá para ativar o aparelho, caso seja necessário. Esta alça deve ter a altura do plano oclusal, para que sua extensão não prejudique a acrilização do aparelho, conforme ilustrado na figura 4. 024 Na distai do último molar é feita uma dobra para cima que acabará por tocar na parte superior do aparelho. O arco dorsal deve tocar a cervical dos dentes posteriores para ajudar a manter a mordida construtiva. 025 Na Classe II por excesso maxilar pode ser usada ancoragem extrabucal apoiada em um aparelho removível (Thurow) ou ancoragem apoiada em bandas nos primeiros molares superiores20'22. Esta abordagem vale para crianças antes do surto de crescimento puberal, quando a maxila está em franco desenvolvimento' embora a colaboração nem sempre seja suficiente3 026 Quando o paciente passou do surto de crescimento ou não quis usar a ancoragem extrabucal o tratamento pode ser realizado com distalizadores de molares ou ortodontia corretiva com ou sem extrações2. 027 Os indivíduos dolicocéfalos têm predomínio de crescimento vertical. Durante o crescimento, a maxila tende a crescer verticalmente enquanto a mandíbula rotaciona no sentido horário, levando o queixo para baixo e para trás15. 028 No final, o trespasse horizontal aumenta e a Classe II se estabelece. Nestes casos não ocorre deficiência de crescimento ‘je mandibular, embora a mandíbula se encontre bastante retruída . Ao contrário, muitos pacientes têm a mandíbula longa em relação à maxila, que apenas parece retruída pela rotação horária. 029 Em termos de tratamento, este quadro é bastante grave, pois nenhuma abordagem é totalmente eficaz. Uma vez que a mandíbula não é curta, os ativadores ortopédicos não melhoram o quadro clínico12. 030 A descrição abaixo e as fotografias anexas mostram a disposição do dispositivo ortopédico funcional dos maxilares para crescimento mandibular: 10, - ACRILIZAÇÃO DO APARELHO 031 A acrilização segue o mesmo protocolo de todos os outros aparelhos removíveis. O primeiro passo consiste em prender com cera as peças nos locais adequados, verificando se cada uma delas está bem feita. 032 É preferível acrilizar separadamente a parte inferior e superior. Após a acrilização, um desgaste inicial pode ser feito para facilitar o acabamento. 033 O aparelho volta, então, para a charneira para ser conectado na mordida construtiva. Nesta hora é feita a retenção na ponta do arco dorsal (4). 034 Finalmente, depois de ajustada a retenção, uma pequena porção de acrílico (5) é inserida para conectar as duas partes do aparelho. 11. - Bibliografia: - 1-Baccetti T, Franchi L, Kim L. The effect of time on the outcomes of one-phase nonextraction therapy of Class II malocclusion. Trabalho apresentado durante o Moyers Symposium da Universidade de Michigan em março de 2008, aceito para publicação no Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop, sem data antes da publicação deste trabalho; -2-Bowman SJ. One-stage versus two-stage treatment:Are two really necessary. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop, 1988,113,11 -16; - 3-Brandão M, Pinho HS, Urias D. Clinicai and quantitative assesment of headgear compliance: A pilot study. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2006, 129:239-44; - 4-Calheiros A A, Miguel JAM, Moura PM, Almeida MAO, Tratamento da má oclusão de Classe II de Angle em duas fases: avaliação da efetividade e eficácia por meio do índice PAR. R Dental Press,2008,13: 43-53; - 5-Cançado RH,Pinzan A,Janson G,Henriques JFC,Neves LS,Canuto EC, Occlusal outcomes and efficiency of 1- and 2-phase protocols in the treatment of Class II Division 1 malocclusion, Am J Orthod dentofac Orthop,2008,133: 245-253; - 6- Carlson DS. Growth modification from molecules to mandibles IN: McNamara Jr JÁ editor. GROWTH MODIFICATION: WHAT WORKS,WHAT DOESNT, AND WHY. Monograph n35, craniofacial growth series. Ann Arbor: Center for humam growth and development, University of Miehigan, 1999:17-65; - 7- Chen JY, Will LA, Niederman R. Analysis of efficacy of functional appliances on mandibular growth. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2002;122:470-476;8, - DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION 013 The present Utility Model patent relates to Bone Growth Stimulus Device for the Treatment of Skeletal Class II for Failure of Mandibular Growth, (1) aims to offer a Device with the following configurations: 014 As a way of standardizing this position, as illustrated in Figure 1, the space between the mesial of the first deciduous molars (or first premolars if the patient has them) and the distal of the second deciduous molars (or second premolars) is used. 015 Coffin spring (2) must be made of 1.2 mm thread. If a screw needs to be installed, it will be placed in the same position as Coffin (2). 016 The buccal arch (3) (Figure 2) may be passive in order to facilitate adaptation of the appliance to the constructive or active bite when the upper incisors are to be inclined to the palate. We basically use Hawley's bow. 017 The labial plate (6) (figure 3) can be continuous (made of an acrylic part only) or split. 018 The split plate (Figure 4) is used when an expander is projected at the bottom to allow the apparatus to be opened. 019 Both (0.8mm wire) start with a lingual retention, which can never touch or get too far away from the plaster, to facilitate acrylic 020 When the plate is split it is necessary to make the handle. activation (7). The activation handle (7) is a simple handle with two holds (8), one for each side. Please note that all retentions (8) are positioned roughly in the middle of the lip plate design (6) to allow a dorsal arch (4) to be made. 021 The dorsal arch (4) is a part that has the responsibility to connect the two parts of the device and maintain the constructive bite. It should be made with 1.2mm thick wire to prevent it from breaking easily. 022 Lower retention begins as seen in figure 4. This retention should be neither too low nor near the cervical to facilitate acrylization. 023 After the resin has been removed, a handle (7) is used to activate the device if necessary. This handle should have the height of the occlusal plane so that its extension does not impair the appliance's acrylization, as shown in figure 4. 024 At the distal of the last molar an upward fold is made that will eventually touch the upper part of the appliance. The dorsal arch should touch the cervical posterior teeth to help maintain the constructive bite. 025 In Class II maxillary excess may be used extraoral anchorage supported on a removable appliance (Thurow) or banded anchorage on the upper first molars20'22. This approach is valid for children before the pubertal growth spurt, when the maxilla is in full development 'although collaboration is not always sufficient3 026 When the patient has passed the growth spurt or did not want to use the extraoral anchorage, treatment can be performed with distalizers. of molars or corrective orthodontics with or without extractions2. 027 Dolichocephalus individuals have a predominance of vertical growth. During growth, the jaw tends to grow vertically while the jaw rotates clockwise, bringing the chin down and back15. 028 In the end, horizontal overrun increases and Class II is established. In these cases there is no deficiency in the mandibular growth, although the mandible is quite retracted. In contrast, many patients have a long jaw in relation to the maxilla, which only seems to be retracted by the clockwise rotation. 029 In terms of treatment, this picture is quite serious as no approach is fully effective. Since the mandible is not short, orthopedic activators do not improve the clinical picture12. 030 The description below and the accompanying photographs show the arrangement of the functional orthopedic device of the jaws for mandibular growth: 10, - ACCILYMENT OF THE APPLIANCE 031 The acrylization follows the same protocol as all other removable appliances. The first step is to wax the pieces in the proper places, checking that each one is well made. 032 It is preferable to separate the lower and upper parts separately. After acrylization, an initial wear can be made to facilitate finishing. 033 The apparatus then returns to the hinge to be connected to the mounting bite. At this time the retention is made at the tip of the dorsal arch (4). Finally, after the retention has been adjusted, a small portion of acrylic (5) is inserted to connect the two parts of the apparatus. 11. - Bibliography: - 1-Baccetti T, Franchi L, Kim L. The effect of time on the outcomes of one-phase nonextraction therapy of Class II malocclusion. Paper presented at the University of Michigan Moyers Symposium in March 2008, accepted for publication at Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop, undated prior to the publication of this work; -2-Bowman SJ. One-stage versus two-stage treatment: Are two really necessary. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop, 1988,113,11 -16; - 3-Brandão M, Pinho HS, Urias D. Clinical and quantitative assessment of headgear compliance: A pilot study. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2006, 129: 239-44; - 4-Calheiros A A, Miguel JAM, Moura PM, Almeida MAO, Treatment of Angle Class II malocclusion in two phases: evaluation of effectiveness and effectiveness by means of the PAR index. R Dental Press, 2008, 13: 43-53; - 5-Cançado RH, Pinzan A, Janson G, Henriques JFC, Neves LS, Canuto EC, Occlusal outcomes and efficiency of 1- and 2-phase protocols in the treatment of Class II Division 1 malocclusion, Am J Orthod dentofac Orthop, 2008 , 133: 245-253; - 6- Carlson DS. Growth modification from molecules to mandibles IN: McNamara Jr ALREADY EDITOR. GROWTH MODIFICATION: WHAT WORKS, WHAT DOESNT, AND WHY. Monograph n35, craniofacial growth series. Ann Arbor: Center for Human Growth and Development, University of Miehigan, 1999: 17-65; - 7- Chen JY, Will LA, Niederman R. Analysis of efficacy of functional appliances on mandibular growth. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2002; 122: 470-476;

- 8- Clark WJ. The Twin-block technique. Am J- 8- Clark WJ. The Twin-block technique. Am j

Orthod. 1988;93:1-18; - 9- Council of Scientific Affairs, American Association os Orthodontics (Huang G, English J, Ferguson D, KulbershR, Oesterle L, Hyun-Duck N, Shroff B, Southard T, Turpin D). Functional appliances and long-term effects on mandibular growth. Am J Orthod dentofac Orthop, 2005,128:271-72. - 10-Cozza P.Baccetti T, Franchi L, DeToffol L,McNamara JA, Mandibular changes produced by functional appliances in Class II malocclusion: A systematic review. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop,2006,129:599.e 1 -599.e 12; - 11-Creekmore TD, Radney LJ. Frankel appliance therapy: orthopedic or orthodontic. Am J Orthod. 1983;83:89-108; - 12-Dermaut LR, van den Eynde F, de Pauw G. Skeletal and dento-alveolar changes as a result of headgear activator therapy related to different vertical growth patterns. Eur J Orthod. 1992;14:140-146; - 13-Dermaut LR, Aelbers CMF. Orthopedics in orthodontics: fiction or reality. A review of the literature-Part II. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1996;110:667-671; - 14-Dolce C, McGorray P, Brazeau L, King GF, Wheeler TT. Timing of Class II treatment:Skeletal changes comparing 1-phase and 2-phase tratment. Am J Orthop Dentofac Orthop, 2007,132:481-9; - 15-Enlow D.Manual sobre crecimiento facial, Inter-médica, Buenos Saires, Argentina, 1982; - 16-Faltin K, Faltin RM, Baccetti T, Franchi L, Ghiozzi B, McNamara JA. Long-term effectiveness and treatment timing for bionator therapy. Angle Orthod. 2003;73:221-230. - 17-Fuentes M et all. Lateral functional shift on the mandible:part Il-effects on the gene expression in condylar cartylage. Am J Orthod dentofac Orthop, 2003,123:160-6; -18-GafariJ, ShoferFS, Jacobsson-Hunt U, Markowitz DL, Laster LL. Headgear versus functional regulator in the early treatment of Class II Division 1 malocclusion: a randomized clinicai trial. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1998; 113:51-61; -19-GhafariJ, King GJ, TullochJF. Early treatment of Class II, division 1 malocclusion-comparison of altemative treatment modalities. Clin Orthod Res. 1998;1:107-117.]; - 20-Johnston LE. A comparative analysis of Class II treatments. In: Vig PS, Ribbens KA editor. Science and clinicai judgment in orthodontics. Monograph 19. Craniofacial Growth Series. Ann Arbor: Center for Human Growth and Development; University of Michigan; 1986;p. 103-148; - 21-Keeling S, Wheeler T, King G, Garvan CW, Cohen DA, Cabassa S, McGorray SP, Taylor MG. Anteroposterior skeletal and dental changes after early Class II treatment with bionators and headgear. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop, 1988, 113:40-50; - 22-Kim KR, Muhl ZF. Changes in mandibular growth direction during and after cervical headgear treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2001; 119:522-530; - 23-King GJ, McGorray SP. Wheeler TT, Dolce C, TaylorM. Comparison of peer assessment ratings (PAR) from 1-phase and 2-phase treatment protocols for Class II malocclusions. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2003;123:489-496; - 24-McNamara JA, Carlson DS. Quantitative analysis of temporomandibular joint adaptations to protrusive function. Am J Orthod. 1979;76:593-611; - 25-McNamara JA. Components of Class II malocclusion in children 8-10 years of age. Angle Orthod. 1981;51:177-202; - 26-McNamara JA.Bookstein FL.Shaughnessy TG. Skeletal and dental changes following functional regulator therapy on Class II patients. Am J Orthod. 1985;88:91-110; -27-McNamara JA, Brudon WL. Orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics. Ann Arbor. Needham Press; 2001; -28-Mamandras AH, Allen LP. Mandibular response to orthodontic treatment with the bionator appliance. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1990;97:113-120. -29-Mills CM, McCulloch KJ. Posttreatment changes after successful correction of Class II malocclusions with the Twin-block appliance. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2000; 118:24-33. -30-Moyers RE, van der Linden FPGM, Riolo ML, McNamara JA. Standards of human occlusal development. Monograph 5. Craniofacial Growth Series. Ann Arbor. Center for Human Growth and Development; University ofMichigan; 1976. -31-O'BrienK, WrightJ, Conboy F, Sanjil Y, Mandall N, Chadwick S, et al.. Effectiveness of early orthodontic treatment with the Twin-block appliance: a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial (Part 1: dental and skeletal effects). Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2003; 124:234— 243. -32- 0’Brien K, Wright J, Conboy F, Sanjil Y, Mandall N, Chadwick S, et ah. Effectiveness of early orthodontic treatment with the Twin-block appliance: a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial (Part 2: Psychological effects). Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2003;124:488-95. - 33- Petrovic A, Stutzmann J, Lavergne J. Mechanism of craniofacial growth and modus operandi of functional appliances (a cell-level and cybernetic approach to orthodontic decision making). In: Carlson DS editors. Craniofacial growth theory and orthodontic treatment. Monograph 23. Craniofacial Growth Series. Ann Arbor: Center for Human - 34-Rabie ABM et all. Osteogenesis in the glenoid fossa in response to mandibular advancement. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop, 2001,119:390-400; - 35-Rabie ABM, She TT, Hagg U. Functional appliance therapy accelerates and enhances condylar growth. Am J Orthod dentofac Orthop,2003,123:40-8; - 36-Rossi NJ,Rossi R.C. Ortopedia funcional integrada à ortodontia corretiva.São Paulo:Editora Pancast,1988; - 37-Rossi NJ.Rossi RC. Integração entre a Ortopedia Facial e a Ortodontia corretiva. São Paulo,American Med: 1994; - 38-Rossi NJ, Avaliação radiográfica da ação de um propulsor sobre o crescimento facial de pacientes em odontopediatria, Rio de Janeiro; s.n; 1995. 147 p. tese apresentada a Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro. Faculdade de Odontologia para obtenção do grau de Doutor. Biblioteca Central - Odontologia. - 39—Rossi NJ, Rossi RC, Rode SM, Rode R, Avaliação clínica e cefalométrica do uso de um ativador ortopédico funcional em pacientes pré-adolescentes do sexo feminino portadoras de disostose mandibulofacial. J Bras Ortodontia, 1(2):67-72, mar.-abr. 1996; - 40-Ruf S, Pancherz H. Temporomandibular joint remodeling in adolescents during Herbst treatment: a prospective longitudinal magnetic ressonance imaging and cephalometric radiographic investigation. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop, 1999,115:607-18; - 41-Satravaha S, Towsend N. Stability of skeletal changes after activator tratment of patients with Class II malloclusions. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop, 1999,116:196-206; - 42-Toth LR, McNamaraJA. Treatment effects produced by the Twin-block appliance and the FR-2 appliance of Frankel compared with an untreated Class II sample. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1999;116:597-609; - 43-Tulloch CJF, Phillips C, Proffit WR. The effect of early intervention on skeletal pattern in Class II malocclusion: a randomized clinicai trial. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1997; 111:391-400. - 44-Tulloch CJF, Philips C, Proffit WR. Benefit of early Class II treatment: progress report of a two-phased randomized clinicai trial. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1998; 1 13:62-72; - 45-Tulloch CJF, Proffit WR, Philips C. Outcomes in a 2-phase randomized clinicai trial of early Class II treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2004. 125:657-67; - 46-Tung A, Kiyak A. Psychological influences on the timing of orthodontic treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop, 1988,113:29-39; - 47-Xiong H, Hãgg U, Tang G-H, Rabie ABM, Robinson W. The effect of continuous bite-jumping in adult rats (a morphological study). Angle Orthod. 2004;74:86-92.Orthod. 1988; 93: 1-18; - 9- Council of Scientific Affairs, American Orthodontics Association (Huang G, English J, Ferguson D, KulbershR, Oesterle L, Hyun-Duck N, Shroff B, Southard T, Turpin D). Functional appliances and long-term effects on mandibular growth. Am J Orthod dentofac Orthop, 2005,128: 271-72. - 10-Cozza P. Baccetti T, Franchi L, DeToffol L, McNamara JA, Mandibular changes produced by functional appliances in Class II malocclusion: A systematic review. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 2006,129: 599.e 1 -599.e 12; - 11-Creekmore TD, Radney LJ. Frankel appliance therapy: orthopedic or orthodontic. Am J Orthod. 1983; 83: 89-108; - 12-Dermaut LR, van den Eynde F, by Pauw G. Skeletal and dentoalveolar changes as a result of headgear activator therapy related to different vertical growth patterns. Eur J Orthod. 1992; 14: 140-146; - 13-Dermaut LR, Aelbers CMF. Orthopedics in orthodontics: fiction or reality. A review of the literature-Part II. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1996; 110: 667-671; - 14-Dolce C, McGorray P, Brazeau L, King GF, Wheeler TT. Timing of Class II treatment: Skeletal changes comparing 1-phase and 2-phase treatment. Am J Orthop Dentofac Orthop, 2007,132: 481-9; - 15-Enlow D. Manual on facial growth, Intermedic, Buenos Saires, Argentina, 1982; - 16-Faltin K, Faltin RM, Baccetti T, Franchi L, Ghiozzi B, McNamara JA. Long-term effectiveness and treatment timing for bionator therapy. Angle Orthod. 2003; 73: 221-230. - 17-Fuentes M et al. Functional lateral shift on the mandible: part Il-effects on the expression gene in condylar cartylage. Am J Orthod dentofac Orthop, 2003,123: 160-6; GafariJ, ShoferFS, Jacobsson-Hunt U, Markowitz DL, Laster LL. Headgear versus functional regulator in the early treatment of Class II Division 1 malocclusion: a randomized clinical trial. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1998; 113: 51-61; -19-GhafariJ, King GJ, TullochJF. Early treatment of Class II, division 1 malocclusion-comparison of altemative treatment modalities. Clin Orthod Res. 1998; 1: 107-117.]; - 20-Johnston LE. A comparative analysis of Class II treatments. In: Vig PS, Ribbens KA Editor. Science and clinical judgment in orthodontics. Monograph 19. Craniofacial Growth Series. Ann Arbor: Center for Human Growth and Development; University of Michigan; 1986; 103-148; - 21-Keeling S, Wheeler T, King G, Garvan CW, Cohen DA, Cabassa S, McGorray SP, Taylor MG. Anteroposterior skeletal and dental changes after early Class II treatment with bionators and headgear. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop, 1988, 113: 40-50; - 22-Kim KR, Muhl ZF. Changes in mandibular growth direction during and after cervical headgear treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2001; 119: 522-530; - 23-King GJ, McGorray SP. Wheeler TT, Dolce C, TaylorM. Comparison of peer assessment ratings (PAR) from 1-phase and 2-phase treatment protocols for Class II malocclusions. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2003; 123: 489-496; - 24-McNamara JA, Carlson DS. Quantitative analysis of temporomandibular joint adaptations to protrusive function. Am J Orthod. 1979; 76: 593-611; - 25-McNamara JA. Components of Class II malocclusion in children 8-10 years of age. Angle Orthod. 1981; 51: 177-202; - 26-McNamara JA.Bookstein FL.Shaughnessy TG. Skeletal and dental changes following functional regulator therapy in Class II patients. Am J Orthod. 1985; 88: 91-110; McNamara JA, Brudon WL. Orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics. Ann Arbor. Needham Press; 2001; -28-Mamandras AH, Allen LP. Mandibular response to orthodontic treatment with the bionator appliance. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1990; 97: 113-120. Mills CM, McCulloch KJ. Posttreatment changes after successful correction of Class II malocclusions with the Twin-block appliance. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2000; 118: 24-33. Moyers RE, van der Linden FPGM, Riolo ML, McNamara JA. Standards of human occlusal development. Monograph 5. Craniofacial Growth Series. Ann Arbor. Center for Human Growth and Development; University of Michigan; 1976. -31-O'BrienK, WrightJ, Conboy F, Sanjil Y, Mandall N, Chadwick S, et al .. Effectiveness of early orthodontic treatment with the twin-block appliance: a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial (Part 1: dental and skeletal effects). Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2003; 124: 234-243. O'Brien K, Wright J, Conboy F, Sanjil Y, Mandall N, Chadwick S, et al. Effectiveness of early orthodontic treatment with the Twin-block appliance: a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial (Part 2: Psychological effects). Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2003; 124: 488-95. - 33- Petrovic A, Stutzmann J, Lavergne J. Mechanism of craniofacial growth and modus operandi of functional appliances (a cell-level and cybernetic approach to orthodontic decision making). In: Carlson DS editors. Craniofacial growth theory and orthodontic treatment. Monograph 23. Craniofacial Growth Series. Ann Arbor: Center for Human - 34-Rabie ABM et all. Osteogenesis in the glenoid fossa in response to mandibular advancement. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop, 2001,119: 390-400; - 35-Rabie ABM, She TT, Hagg U. Functional appliance therapy accelerates and enhances condylar growth. Am J Orthod dentofac Orthop, 2003,123: 40-8; - 36-Rossi NJ, Rossi R.C. Functional orthopedics integrated with corrective orthodontics. São Paulo: Editora Pancast, 1988; - 37-Rossi NJ.Rossi RC. Integration between Facial Orthopedics and Corrective Orthodontics. Sao Paulo, American Med: 1994; - 38-Rossi NJ, Radiographic evaluation of the action of a propellant on facial growth of pediatric dentistry patients, Rio de Janeiro; s.n; 1995. 147 p. thesis presented to the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro. Faculty of Dentistry to obtain the degree of Doctor. Central Library - Dentistry. Rossi NJ, Rossi RC, Rode SM, Rode R, Clinical and cephalometric evaluation of the use of a functional orthopedic activator in pre-adolescent female patients with mandibulofacial dysostosis. J Bras Orthodontics, 1 (2): 67-72, Mar.-Apr. 1996; - 40-Ruf S, Pancherz H. Temporomandibular joint remodeling in adolescents during Herbst treatment: a prospective longitudinal magnetic resonance imaging and cephalometric radiographic investigation. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop, 1999,115: 607-18; - 41-Satravaha S, Towsend N. Stability of skeletal changes after activator treatment of patients with Class II malloclusions. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop, 1999,116: 196-206; - 42-Toth LR, McNamaraJA. Treatment effects produced by the Twin-block appliance and the FR-2 appliance of Frankel compared to an untreated Class II sample. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1999; 116: 597-609; - 43-Tulloch CJF, Phillips C, Proffit WR. The effect of early intervention on skeletal pattern in Class II malocclusion: a randomized clinical trial. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1997; 111: 391-400. - 44-Tulloch CJF, Philips C, Proffit WR. Benefit of early Class II treatment: progress report of a two-phased randomized clinical trial. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1998; 11: 62-72; - 45-Tulloch CJF, Proffit WR, Philips C. Outcomes in a 2-phase randomized clinical trial of early Class II treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2004. 125: 657-67; - 46-Tung A, Kiyak A. Psychological influences on the timing of orthodontic treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop, 1988,113: 29-39; - 47-Xiong H, Hgg U, Tang G-H, Rabie ABM, Robinson W. The effect of continuous bite jumping in adult rats (a morphological study). Angle Orthod. 2004; 74: 86-92.

11,- CONCLUSÃO 035 Verifica-se por tudo aquilo que foi descrito e ilustrado que se trata de Dispositivo de Estímulo do Crescimento Ósseo para o Tratamento da Classe II Esquelética por Falta de Crescimento Mandibular, (1), o qual se enquadra perfeitamente dentro das normas que regem a Patente de Modelo de Utilidade, devendo preencher importante lacuna existente no mercado em função de ter desenvolvido e disponibilizar avanço tecnológico considerável, merecendo em consequência, o privilégio solicitado.11, - CONCLUSION 035 It is apparent from all that has been described and illustrated that it is a Bone Growth Stimulation Device for the Treatment of Skeletal Class II due to Lack of Mandibular Growth, (1) which fits perfectly within the standards governing the Utility Model Patent, and must fill a significant gap in the market due to having developed and making available considerable technological advance, thus deserving the privilege requested.

REIVINDICAÇÃOCLAIM

Claims

1.

BONE GROWTH STIMULATION DEVICE FOR TREATMENT OF MANDIBULAR GROWTH FAULTY CLASS II TREATMENT consists of a two-plate device (5) for use on the upper jaw made of self-curing acrylic resin, extending from the distal face of the incisors to the last fully erupted molar of the same arch, and in the central part, these plates (5) connect via a prefabricated steel expansion bolt or a 1-inch stainless steel wire Coffin spring (2) , 2 mm in diameter, the length of which extends from the distal face of the first deciduous or first premolar molars to the distal face of the first deciduous or second premolar molars, is characterized in that the device has a vestibular arch (3) of wire. of 0.8 mm diameter steel that emerges from the distal face of the canines and is mounted at the height of the crown half of the upper central incisors, according to the characteristics of the The clinical features of the patient may also include 0.8mm wire fixation clips on the primary or premolar molars and / or a 0.8mm wire tongue interlayer grid that rests on the acrylic plates (5). and whose height is limited by the incisal faces of the lower incisors, it is also noted that to connect the upper and lower part is inserted the dorsal arch (4), made of a 1.2 mm diameter wire that emerges from a retention (8). ) undulated on the upper acrylic plates (5) on each side, down the distal face of the last molar erupted in the lower arch, undergoes a curve that limits the height to the cervical face of the lower teeth, from the last molar erupted dorsal arch ( 4) touches the cervico-lingual surface of the lower teeth and at the height of the first deciduous or first premolar molars, a loop (7) with the lower occlusal plane height, called the activation loop (7), is made below; we describe that the dorsal arch ends in another retention (8) which will be inserted into the lingual acrylic plate (5), extending from the distal face of the first deciduous or first premolar, limited inferiorly by the floor of the mouth and superiorly by the incisalatal face of the lower incisors. , then on the lingual plate (6) another 0.8 mm steel wire forms the retention (8) of the labial plate, leaving a retention (8) inside the plate, passing through the distal face of the lower canine on either side. and ending with another retention (8) in the region of the buccal alveolar ridge, halfway between the groove and cervical bottom of the lower incisors, finally a new acrylic portion forms the labial plate (6), which connects the retentions (8) on both sides range from the distal canine face, from the groove fundus to the cervical face of the lower incisors.