A comparison of two different rapid palatalexpansion techniques from the point of root resorption

Erverdi, Nejat; Okar, İmer; Küçükkeleş, Nazan; Arbak, Serap

doi:10.1016/s0889-5406(94)70020-6

Cited by 104 publications

(76 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In the literature, some studies suggested that A point moves forward and downward with RME (3,(8)(9)(10)(11)(12)(13) but controversial views are also present (14)(15)(16)(17)(18). In the present study, some increases in SNA angle and the distance of the A point to the vertical reference plane (VR A) were measured in both groups, but these results showed no statistical significance.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 67%

Comparison of Dentofacial and Periodontal Effects of Rapid and Semi-rapid Maxillary Expansion

Gönüldaş¹,

Özsoy²,

Pamukçu³

et al. 2017

meandros

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Anah tar Ke li me ler Öz AbstractObjective: The purpose of this study was to compare the skeletal, dentoalveolar and periodontal effects that occurred after rapid maxillary expansion (RME) and semirapid maxillary expansion (SRME) with an acrylic splint bonded expansion appliance and also to compare the degree of root resorption in the supporting teeth during expansion. Materials and Methods:The sample of the study included 19 patients having maxillary constriction requiring bilateral upper premolar extraction. The semi-rapid group consisted of 10 patients and the rapid group consisted of 9 patients. Lateral and posteroanterior (PA) cephalometric radiographs were taken at the beginning of the treatment, at the end of expansion and after 3 months of retention period. Eleven patients underwent low-dose computed tomography (CT) at the beginning of treatment and at the end of retention period, after giving informed consent. The evaluation of root resorption was made using a scanning electron microscope from the extracted teeth. Results: Both lateral and PA radiographs showed similar changes between the groups. Posterior nasal cavity width, palatal maxillary width, the distance between palatinal roots and the distance between incisor roots showed significant increase in the CT measurements. Buccal bone thickness decreased and palatal bone thickness increased in all molar and premolar teeth examined. Root resorption was seen in both groups, but no significant differences were observed between the groups. Conclusion: Some differences were seen in short-time effects between SRME and RME but these differences were temporary and disappeared at the end of the retention period. The qualitative evaluation of the roots showed that the location and degree of the root resorption were similar between the groups.Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı, akrilik splintli bonded ekspansiyon apareyi ile yapılan yarı hızlı maksiller ekspansiyon (SRME) ve hızlı maksiller ekspansiyon (RME) ile meydana gelen iskeletsel, dentoalveolar ve periodontal etkileri; ayrıca tedavi sırasında destek dişlerde meydana gelen kök rezorpsiyonunun şiddetini karşılaştırmaktır.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 67%

Comparison of Dentofacial and Periodontal Effects of Rapid and Semi-rapid Maxillary Expansion

Gönüldaş¹,

Özsoy²,

Pamukçu³

et al. 2017

meandros

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…32 Researchers have briefly pointed out that repair increases with time histologically but active resorption may be seen after longer fixed retention periods. 25,27,28 Thus, during the retention period in this study, resorption continued-or at least repair did not occur-in the resorption cavities for a time because of the relapse forces mentioned earlier. In addition, when the density of the repaired cementum approached root density, the outcome could be segmented using tomography.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 58%

“…Erverdi et al, 25 Odenrick et al, 26 Barber and Sims, 27 Langford, 28 and Langford and Sims 29 found that statistically significant root resorption occurred after RME in extracted first premolars. We found statistically significant resorption in P1.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation and comparison of root resorption between tooth-borne and tooth-tissue borne rapid maxillary expansion appliances: A CBCT study

Di̇ndaroğlu

Doğan

2015

The Angle Orthodontist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To compare volumetric root resorption after rapid maxillary expansion (RME) between tooth-borne and tissue-borne appliances using CBCT. Repair in resorption cavities after 6 months of fixed retention was also compared. Materials and Methods: A sample of 33 subjects were randomly divided into two groups: Hyrax (n 5 16) and Haas (n 5 17). CBCT scans were taken 6 months before expansion, immediately after expansion, and 6 months after fixed retention. Mimics Innovation V 16.0 software was used for segmentation and volumetric measurement of 198 teeth. Bland-Altman plots, independent samples t test, repeated measures analysis of variance, and the Friedman test were used for statistical analysis. Results: Differences in root resorption after RME and repair after retention were not significant between the hyrax and Haas appliances or between male and female. Significant differences were found between preexpansion and postexpansion root volumes in the first premolars and molarseven in unattached second premolars. When the percentage of root volume loss is considered, no significant difference was found between the first premolar, second premolar, and first molar. Volumetric changes after 6 months of retention were not statistically significant.

show abstract

“…Application of the inclusion and exclusion criteria and follow-up on the referred studies identified 30 relevant publications (Figure 1). [3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34] Heterogeneity of the results of the investigations with similar technique of maxillary expansion was high (.85%). A meta-analysis was not performed for this reason.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does rapid maxillary expansion induce adverse effects in growing subjects?

Lione¹,

Franchi

Cozza³

2012

The Angle Orthodontist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To assess the scientific evidence that rapid maxillary expansion (RME) causes Adverse Effects on the midpalatal suture, vertical dimension, dental and periodontal structures in growing subjects. Materials and Methods: Electronic databases were searched for articles dated through December 2011. The quality of the studies was ranked on a 13-point scale in which 1 was the low end of the scale and 13 was the high end. Results: Thirty relevant articles were identified. The amount of midpalatal suture opening ranged from 1.6 to 4.3 mm in the anterior region and from 1.2 to 4.4 mm in the posterior region. At the end of the active phase, RME resulted in slight inferior movement of the maxilla (SN-PNS +0.9 mm; SN-ANS +1.6 mm), increased tipping of anchored teeth from 3.4u to 9.2u and bending of the alveolar bone from 5.1u to 11.3u. In the long term, RME did not modify the facial growth patterns, and no significant changes on dentoalveolar structures were observed. Of the 30 studies, 2 were medium-high quality, 8 were medium quality, and 20 were low quality. Conclusions: RME always opened the midpalatal suture in growing subjects. The vertical changes were small and transitory. In the long-term evaluation, an uprighting of anchored teeth was observed and periodontal structures were not compromised. (Angle Orthod. 2013;83:172-182.)

show abstract

A comparison of two different rapid palatalexpansion techniques from the point of root resorption

Cited by 104 publications

References 7 publications

Comparison of Dentofacial and Periodontal Effects of Rapid and Semi-rapid Maxillary Expansion

Comparison of Dentofacial and Periodontal Effects of Rapid and Semi-rapid Maxillary Expansion

Evaluation and comparison of root resorption between tooth-borne and tooth-tissue borne rapid maxillary expansion appliances: A CBCT study

Does rapid maxillary expansion induce adverse effects in growing subjects?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About