Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2022 May 4:11:8.
doi: 10.4103/jos.jos_153_21. eCollection 2022.

Bone-anchored maxillary protraction (BAMP): A review

Apoorva Kamath  1 , Shetty Suhani Sudhakar  1 , Greeshma Kannan  1 , Kripal Rai  2 , Athul Sb  3
Affiliations
Review

Bone-anchored maxillary protraction (BAMP): A review

Apoorva Kamath et al. J Orthod Sci. .

Abstract

Introduction: Protraction therapy for maxillary deficiency in the treatment of skeletal class III malocclusion involves the use of facemask. Conventionally facemask has been anchored to the maxillary dentition, which is responsible for some of the counter-productive effects of facemask therapy including backward and downward rotation of the chin, increase in the lower anterior facial height, proclination of maxillary incisors, retroclination of mandibular incisors apart from mesialization of maxillary molars with extrusion and decreased overbite.

Aim: The aim of this article is to highlight the nuances of Bone-Anchored Maxillary Protraction (BAMP) including a literature review, which is comprehensive and narrative and comparing the different techniques involved such as type 1 BAMP versus type 2 BAMP and BAMP versus facemask.

Materials and methods: A computerized search was performed in electronic databases such as PubMed, PubMed Central, Cochrane, Embase, DOAJ, and Google scholar using key words such as "bone-anchored maxillary protraction" and "BAMP." The search was confined to articles in English published till March 2021. Forty-seven case-controlled, cross-sectional, retrospective and prospective studies, as well as systematic reviews and meta-analysis were included in this article, which were limited to human subjects. A hand search of the reference lists of the included articles was also carried out to include missed out articles.

Conclusion: To overcome these drawbacks, BAMP was introduced, which causes both maxillary protraction, restraint of mandibular growth with minimal dentoalveolar changes. BAMP is used widely nowadays in the treatment of skeletal class III malocclusion.

Keywords: BAMP; bone anchored maxillary protraction; class III; facemask; malocclusion.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

There are no conflicts of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Type 1 BAMP Therapy
Figure 2
Figure 2
Type 2 BAMP Therapy
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Ishii H, Morita S, Takeuchi Y. Treatment effect of combined maxillary protraction and chincap appliance in severe skeletal Class III cases. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 1987;92:304–12. - PubMed
    1. Allwright WC, Burndred WH. A survey of handicapping dentofacial anomalies among Chinese in Hong Kong. Int Dent J. 1964;14:505–19.
    1. Cordasco G, Matarese G, Rustico L, Fastuca S, Caprioglio A, Lindauer SJ. Efficacy of orthopedic treatment with protraction facemask on skeletal Class III malocclusion: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Orthod Craniofac Res. 2014;17:133–43. - PubMed
    1. Pinskaya YB, Hsieh TJ, Roberts WE, Hartsfield JK. Comprehensive clinical evaluation as an outcome assessment for a graduate orthodontics program. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2004;126:533–43. - PubMed
    1. Lin Y, Guo R, Hou L, Fu Z, Li W. Stability of maxillary protraction therapy in children with Class III malocclusion: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin Oral Investig. 2018;22:2639–52. - PubMed