Do different maxillary expansion appliances influence the outcomes of the treatment?

Algharbi, Muteb; Bazargani, Farhan; Dimberg, Lillemor

doi:10.1093/ejo/cjx035

Cited by 31 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…CBCT is an effective method in orthodontics diagnosis and an indispensable aid in daily clinical practice [ 31 ]. This technique is reliable also to assess transverse maxillary dimensions as demonstrated in a review [ 32 ] comparing different RME appliances and expansion protocols.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Early Orthodontic Treatments of Unilateral Posterior Crossbite: A Systematic Review

Caroccia

Moscagiuri

Falconio

et al. 2020

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We aimed to report an update of the systematic review by Petrén et al. (2003). The objective was to evaluate how orthodontic treatments can affect unilateral posterior crossbite (UPXB) in primary and early mixed dentition. Several databases were consulted, and articles published between January 2002 and March 2020 were selected. This review examines the following studies: randomized clinical trials, prospective and retrospective studies with concurrent untreated or normal control groups, and clinical trials comparing at least two treatment strategies. Among the 1581 articles retrieved from the searches, 11 studies were included. Quad-helix (QH) and expansion plate (EP) appliances were compared in three studies. One study compared rapid maxillary expansion (RME) treatment anchored on primary dentition otherwise on permanent molars. One study compared RME and a modified RME with arms extended until deciduous canine and EP. Four studies evaluated the effects of expansion appliances compared with a control group. Compared with the previous review, the quality of the included studies is higher. However, heterogeneity of treatments, different strategies in measurements, lack of a similar follow-up length, and absence of a cost-effectiveness analysis preclude the possibility of providing reliable scientific evidence on the most effective UPXB treatment in primary and early mixed dentition.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Early Orthodontic Treatments of Unilateral Posterior Crossbite: A Systematic Review

Caroccia

Moscagiuri

Falconio

et al. 2020

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…According to Algharbi et al (2018) and Maspero et al (2020) the Hyrax orthodonticorthopedic appliance is the most commonly used in young people, due to its easy adaptation, being activated by the patient or guardian with professional guidance through an intraoral device. Activation is painless, and occurs between 2 to 4 weeks, and should be used for a minimum of 3 months.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bone-borne distractor versus tooth-borne distractor for maxillary expansion: a Systematic Review

Barbosa

Vieira

Sales

et al. 2020

RSD

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The etiology of transverse maxillary deficiency is considered multifactorial, and has a deleterious effect on the bone development of the maxilla and nasal cavities, causing maxillary atresia and posterior crossbite. The objective of this systematic review was to compare in the scientific literature the effectiveness of the maxillary disjunction treated using dental distractor versus bone distractor. A systematic literature review was performed using the Science Direct, Embase, Cochrane Collaboration Library, and PubMed / MEDLINE databases. The search strategy provided a total of 119 studies. After screening by reading the titles and abstracts, seven articles met all the criteria and were included in this systematic review. Studies have shown that the choice of type of orthodontic-orthopedic appliance is directly related to the prior individualized planning of each patient. With regard to patients who are in the development phase, the recommendation is the use of dental maxillary expanders, such as the Hyrax appliance. In addition, it is not recommended to perform rapid maxillary expansion in adult patients, due to the expansion resistance that occurs in the palatine sutures. The treatment of patients with closed median palatine suture must be done by surgically assisted maxillary expansion.

show abstract

“…Uno de los tratamientos de ortodoncia para la corrección de la mordida cruzada (uni/bilateral) secundaria a la deficiencia maxilar transversal, es la disyunción maxilar rápida, ya que logra estimular el crecimiento del maxilar al transmitir grandes fuerzas hacia la red de suturas circunmaxilares (1,3,4,5,6,7) . Para que esto ocurra, es gravitante que las suturas aún sean susceptibles (estén abiertas, permeables, poco imbricadas) a los estímulos mecánicos que transmiten los aparatos de ortodoncia, condición particularmente esperable en pacientes jóvenes y en crecimiento (4,6) .…”

Section: Problemaunclassified

Disyunción maxilar rápida asistida con microtornillos en pacientes en crecimiento con deficiencia maxilar transversal.

Silva-Ruz

Tort-Barahona

Acuña-Aracena

et al. 2021

Int. j interdiscip. dent.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Do different maxillary expansion appliances influence the outcomes of the treatment?

Abstract: This systematic review was not registered in any external databases.

Cited by 31 publications

References 25 publications

Early Orthodontic Treatments of Unilateral Posterior Crossbite: A Systematic Review

Early Orthodontic Treatments of Unilateral Posterior Crossbite: A Systematic Review

Bone-borne distractor versus tooth-borne distractor for maxillary expansion: a Systematic Review

Disyunción maxilar rápida asistida con microtornillos en pacientes en crecimiento con deficiencia maxilar transversal.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About