Journals / Dicle Dental Journal / 2026 / Volume: 27 Issue: 2

Correction of facial asymmetry and functional shift using posterior bite block and fixed orthodontic treatment: a case report

İlayda Kırdemir(TRAKYA ÜNİVERSİTESİ, DİŞ HEKİMLİĞİ FAKÜLTESİ)0009-0005-3065-3031
Pamir Meriç(TRAKYA ÜNİVERSİTESİ, DİŞ HEKİMLİĞİ FAKÜLTESİ)0000-0002-4655-5664
Pages
—
Publication Date
2026-08-31
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The posterior bite block presents a good alternative for patients at risk of developing openbite during crossbite correction.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Functional shifts are significant due to the risk of becoming permanent and causing skeletal problems if not treated at an early age.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Functional shift was diagnosed clinically by guiding the mandible into centric relation, revealing a transverse discrepancy and crossbite in teeth 22,23 and 24.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The posterior bite block presents a good alternative for patients at risk of developing openbite during crossbite correction.
🔬Design:Case Report
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Posterior bite block · functional shift · facial asymmetry

Abstract

Functional shifts are significant due to the risk of becoming permanent and causing skeletal problems if not treated at an early age. Functional shift was diagnosed clinically by guiding the mandible into centric relation, revealing a transverse discrepancy and crossbite in teeth 22,23 and 24. This case report describes the correction of functional shift and associated issues, including deviation of the lower midline, crossbite in teeth 22, 23, and 24, and facial asymmetry, through the use of a posterior bite block and fixed orthodontic treatment. Facial asymmetry was assessed through clinical examination and standardized frontal photographic analysis. A posterior bite block was selected to eliminate occlusal interference, allow mandibular repositioning, and control vertical dimension during crossbite correction. In a 15-year-8-month-old female patient, the crossbite was corrected within 3 months with the use of a posterior bite block and upper arch bracketing. Subsequently, to achieve an ideal occlusion, lower arch bracketing and intermaxillary elastics were applied. After 13 months of treatment, the patient achieved a functional occlusion, with significant improvement in facial asymmetry. The posterior bite block presents a good alternative for patients at risk of developing openbite during crossbite correction.

🔖

Cite This Article

Kırdemir, İ., Meriç, P. (2026). Correction of facial asymmetry and functional shift using posterior bite block and fixed orthodontic treatment: a case report. Dicle Dental Journal, Volume: 27 Issue: 2. https://ajindex.com/articles/1643246

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (18)

  1. Major PW, Johnson DE. A comparison of maximum intercuspation and centric relation using mounted models. J Prosthet Dent. 1991;65(4):538-543.
  2. Chen Q, Zhang Y, Wang Y, et al. Treatment of a mandibular functional shift in an adolescent boy with temporomandibular disorder and crossbites. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2015;148(4):660-673.
  3. Naini FB, Gill DS. Facial aesthetics: clinical assessment of facial proportion. Dent Update. 2008;35(3):159-170.
  4. Trotman CA, Stohler CS. Effect of malocclusion on the distribution of regional facial growth. Eur J Orthod. 1993;15(6):475-483.
  5. Pacheco MC, Casagrande CF, Teixeira LP, Finck NS, Araújo MT. Mouth breathing and its impact on dentofacial development: a systematic review. Dent J (Basel). 2024;12(2):21.
  6. McNamara JA. Early intervention in the transverse dimension: Is it worth the effort? Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2002;121(6):572-574.
  7. Haraguchi S, Takada K, Yasuda Y. Facial asymmetry in subjects with skeletal Class III deformity. Angle Orthod. 2002;72(1):28-35.
  8. Beyer JW, Lindauer SJ. Evaluation of dental midline position. Semin Orthod. 1998;4(3):146-152.
  9. Lombardo L, Palone M, Siciliani G. Vertical dimension control using bite-block therapy: a retrospective study. Children (Basel). 2024;11:1252.
  10. Agrawal M, Agrawal JA, Nanjannawar L, Fulari S, Kagi V. Dentofacial asymmetries: challenging diagnosis and treatment planning. J Int Oral Health. 2015;7:128-131.
  11. Janson G, Dainesi EA, Henriques JF, de Freitas MR, de Lima KJ. Class II subdivision treatment success rate with symmetric and asymmetric extraction protocols. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2003;124(3):257-264.
  12. Kim HJ, Yum KW, Lee SS, Seo KS. Muscle hypertrophy and reduction in masseter muscle following botulinum toxin type A injection. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2003;61(8):1043-1047.
  13. de Leeuw R, Klasser GD. Orofacial pain: guidelines for assessment, diagnosis, and management. Chicago: Quintessence Publishing; 2013.
  14. Sadick NS, Manhas-Bhutani S, Krueger N. Aesthetic facial contouring using injectable fillers: indications, outcomes, and patient satisfaction. J Clin Aesthet Dermatol. 2017;10(8):28-34.
  15. Severt TR, Proffit WR. The prevalence of facial asymmetry in the dentofacial deformities population at the University of North Carolina. Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg. 1997;12:171-176.
  16. Proffit WR, Fields HW, Sarver DM. Contemporary Orthodontics. 5th ed. St Louis: Elsevier; 2013. p.380-385.
  17. Graber TM, Vanarsdall RL, Vig KWL. Orthodontics: Current Principles and Techniques. 5th ed. St Louis: Elsevier; 2012. p.812-818.
  18. Proffit WR, Fields HW, Sarver DM. Contemporary Orthodontics. 5th ed. St Louis: Elsevier; 2013. p.599-602.