This study examined the effectiveness of maxillary protraction with orthopedic appliances in Class III patients. A meta-analysis of relevant literature was performed to determine whether a consensus exists regarding controversial issues such as the timing of treatment and the use of adjunctive intraoral appliances. An initial search identified 440 articles relating to Class III malocclusion. Among those articles, 11 studies in English and 3 studies in foreign languages met the previously established selection criteria. Data from the selected studies were categorized by age and appliance groups for the meta-analysis. The sample sizes were comparable between the groups. The statistical synthesis of changes before and after treatment in selected cephalometric landmarks showed no distinct difference between the palatal expansion group and nonexpansion group except for 1 variable, upper incisor angulation, which increased to a greater degree in the nonexpansion group. This finding implies that more skeletal effect and less dental change are produced in the expansion appliance group. Examination of the effects of age revealed greater treatment changes in the younger group. Results indicate that protraction face mask therapy is effective in patients who are growing, but to a lesser degree in patients who are older than 10 years of age, and that protraction in combination with an initial period of expansion may provide more significant skeletal effects. Overall mean values and corresponding standard deviations for the studies selected can also be used to estimate mean treatment effects expected from the use of protraction face mask.