Relapse following maxillary expansion

Mew, John

doi:10.1016/0002-9416(83)90272-5

Cited by 82 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…12 -16 The retention period can extend to 18 months, depending on the clinical situation. 15 We examined teeth extracted 3 months, 6 months and 18 months into the retention period, to determine whether any observed vascular changes were reversible.…”

Section: Histopathology Of Pulpal Tissue After Rapid Maxillary Expansionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Histopathological Investigation of Pulpal Tissue following Heavy Orthopaedic Forces Produced by Rapid Maxillary Expansion

et al. 2003

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aimed to investigate the effects of heavy orthopaedic forces, produced by rapid maxillary expansion, on pulpal tissue of pre-molar teeth. Teeth extracted as part of an orthodontic treatment plan, an average of 3 months, 6 months and 18 months after rapid maxillary expansion, were analysed using histopathological techniques. Control teeth were extracted, for orthodontic reasons, before any force treatment. Non-parametric tests were used to compare the results from the three treatment groups and one control group. Vessel diameter, haemorrhage, congestion and inflammatory cell infiltration varied between groups, and the differences between the control and 3-month groups, and the 3-month and 18-month groups were most significant. In conclusion, orthopaedic forces exerted by rapid maxillary expansion caused reversible vascular changes in pulpal tissue of upper pre-molar teeth.

show abstract

Section: Histopathology Of Pulpal Tissue After Rapid Maxillary Expansionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Histopathological Investigation of Pulpal Tissue following Heavy Orthopaedic Forces Produced by Rapid Maxillary Expansion

et al. 2003

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Slow expansion appliances have been shown in animal experiments to produce less disruption of the suture, allow more physiologic adjustment to sutural separation, and greater sutural stability than rapid expansion . SME procedures encounter less tissue resistance of the circumaxillary structures and improved bone formation in the intermaxillary sutures, which is thought to minimize post‐expansion relapse . The advent of RME has had a dramatic impact on the ability to treat transverse discrepancies.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A preliminary 3‐D comparison of rapid and slow maxillary expansion in children: A randomized clinical trial

Ribeiro

Jacob

Brunetto³

et al. 2020

Int J Paed Dentistry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background This study compared the effects of rapid maxillary expansion (RME) and slow maxillary expansion (SME) using cone‐beam computed tomography (CBCT). Aim To evaluate the skeletal and dentoalveolar effects produced by two different maxillary expansion protocols. Design Eligibility criteria included maxillary transverse deficiencies in children (mean age, 8.18 years old), randomly assigned to either RME or SME. At the outcome analysis phase, a sample of 29 subjects were analysed (RME group, N = 16 and SME group, N = 13). CBCT scans taken before expansion and 6 months later were evaluated. Five posterior and 6 anterior transverse measurements were made at different vertical levels. Treatment changes were analysed using paired t tests; independent t tests were used to compare the two groups. Results There were statistically significant (P<.05) increases in maxillary width at the skeletal, alveolar, and dental levels for both groups, with significantly smaller increases at the more superior than inferior levels. The RME group exhibited statistically larger width increases than the SME group for all measures except interorbital width, anterior alveolar process width, and intercanine width. The group differences were greater for anterior than posterior apical base widths. Conclusions Rapid maxillary expansion produced greater orthopaedic effects than slow maxillary expansion, with the greatest effects occurring in the anterior apical base.

show abstract

“…To eliminate these disadvantages and achieve a more physiological tissue reaction, slow maxillary expansion became more popular [7,26,27] although skeletal effects were less evident [7,12,19]. …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison between rapid and mixed maxillary expansion through an assessment of dento-skeletal effects on posteroanterior cephalometry

et al. 2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundThe aim of this study is to compare the dento-skeletal effects of rapid maxillary expansion (RME) and mixed maxillary expansion (MME), assessed on posteroanterior (PA) cephalograms.MethodsTreatment groups consisted of 42 patients; mean age in RME group (n = 21,13 female and 8 male subjects) was 8.8 years ± 1.37 at T0 and 9.6 years ± 1.45 at T1 and mean age in MME group (n = 21, 12 female and 9 male patients) was 8.9 years ± 2.34 at T0 and 10.5 years ± 2.08 at T1. Seventeen bilateral anatomic landmarks, 16 linear (12 skeletal and 4 dental) and 4 angular measurements were assessed for each patient at T0 and T1. Data from the two groups were compared using independent sample t test (p < 0.05).ResultsAt T0, the groups were similar for all examined variables (p > 0.05). Significant and equal increase of lateronasal and maxillary and upper and lower molar widths (p < 0. 01) occurred in both groups at T1. Significant but different increases were observed for maxillary incisal, upper left first molar-lateroorbitale, and maxillary first molar angles (p < 0.001 vs. p < 0.05). Significant increases were reported for upper inter-incisal width apex (p < 0.001) and upper right first molar-lateroorbitale angle (p < 0.05) only in the RME group. At T1, differences in maxillary incisal angle (p < 0.05), upper left first molar-lateroorbitale, and maxillary first molar angles (p < 0.001) were noted.ConclusionsRME and MME were both effective to increase skeletal transverse dimensions by opening mid-palatal suture in growing patients, while MME was associated with minor dental side effects than RME.

show abstract

Relapse following maxillary expansion

Cited by 82 publications

References 8 publications

The Histopathological Investigation of Pulpal Tissue following Heavy Orthopaedic Forces Produced by Rapid Maxillary Expansion

The Histopathological Investigation of Pulpal Tissue following Heavy Orthopaedic Forces Produced by Rapid Maxillary Expansion

A preliminary 3‐D comparison of rapid and slow maxillary expansion in children: A randomized clinical trial

Comparison between rapid and mixed maxillary expansion through an assessment of dento-skeletal effects on posteroanterior cephalometry

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About