Comparison of nasal volume changes during rapid maxillary expansion using acoustic rhinometry and computed tomography

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to compare nasal volume changes using acoustic rhinometry (AR) and computed tomography (CT). The subjects were 10 children (6 girls and 4 boys, with an age range of 12-14 years) who required rapid maxillary expansion (RME) on the basis of their individual malocclusion. All patients were found to have normal nasal cavities following anterior rhinoscopic examination. AR and CT were undertaken at the start of treatment (t(1)) and 6 months after expansion (t(2)). Volume changes due to expansion were evaluated using Wilcoxon's test, and the correlation between the two methods was assessed with correlation analyses. Both methods demonstrated that nasal volume significantly increased following the use of RME (P<0.05). Correlation analyses showed no difference in volume (P>0.05) using either of the two methods.

Comparison of the effects of RME and fan-type RME on nasal airway by using acoustic rhinometry

“…16 Cephalograms, tomography, and rhinomanometry methods are used to examine the nasal airway and related dentofacial structures. 8 AR is a method that allows quick, painless, and noninvasive application and requires minimal patient cooperation. AR showed a reasonable correlation with CT in a cadaver.…”

“…In the past decade, computerized tomography (CT) has become very popular in the diagnosis of deformities and structures of the body, but the disadvantages of CT include exposure to radiation and high costs. 8 Acoustic rhinometry (AR) was introduced by Hilberg et al 9 in 1989 as a simple, noninvasive, and objective method for measuring the dimensions of the nasal cavity and nasal airway resistance. The principle of AR is based on the reflection of sound waves within the nasal cavity.…”

Three-dimensional changes of the naso-maxillary complex following rapid maxillary expansion

“…Using 3D simulation and modeling programs, Gö rgü lü et al 11 found a significant nasal volume increase of 12.14%. A significant increase in nasal volume was shown also using acoustic rhinometry; 9 Babacan et al 8 estimated this increase to be 13.80% without decongestant and 15.16% with decongestant, while others 12 found a significant increase of nasal cavity volume by 15.20% and nasopharynx volume by 10 concluded that RME is usually accompanied by increases in area and volume of the nasal cavity, and these changes remained stable 3 months after treatment. The nasal volume increase of 17% reported in this study was quite close to values published in previous studies.…”

“…The nasal volume increase of 17% reported in this study was quite close to values published in previous studies. [8][9][10][11][12] Several articles focused on evaluating RME effects on MSV; Pangrazio-Kulbersh et al 4 noticed a significant increase of between 6% and 11%, while others 12 didn't find any significant difference in MSV. Maxillary volume modifications following RME have not been evaluated.…”

“…6 Disarticulating these sutures will lead to anatomical changes in the nasal cavity with an increase in the nasal volume, [7][8][9][10][11][12] which decreases the nasal airway resistance, establishes predominant nasal respiration, and improves the nasal airway ventilation. 13,14 This procedure has also been proved to offer an effective method for treating children with obstructive sleep apnea syndrome.…”