Longitudinal stability of rapid and slow maxillary expansion
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this retrospective study was to compare the longitudinal stability of two types of posterior crossbite correction: rapid maxillary expansion (RME) and slow maxillary expansion (SME).METHODS: Study casts of 90 adolescent patients were assessed for interdental width changes at th...
Gespeichert in:
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Dataset |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext bestellen |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | OBJECTIVE: The aim of this retrospective study was to compare the longitudinal stability of two types of posterior crossbite correction: rapid maxillary expansion (RME) and slow maxillary expansion (SME).METHODS: Study casts of 90 adolescent patients were assessed for interdental width changes at three different periods: pretreatment (T1), post-treatment (T2) and at least, five years post-retention (T3). Three groups of 30 patients were established according to the treatment received to correct posterior crossbite: Group A (RME), group B (SME) and group C (control- Edgewise therapy only). After crossbite correction, all patients received fixed edgewise orthodontic appliances. Paired t-tests and one-way ANOVA were used to identify significant intra and intergroup changes, respectively (P < 0.05).RESULTS: Except for intercanine distance, all widths increased in groups A and B from T1 to T2. In the long-term, the amount of relapse was not different for groups A and B, except for 3-3 widths which showed greater decrease in group A. However, the percentage of clinically relapsed cases of posterior crossbite was similar for rapid and slow maxillary expansion.CONCLUSION: Rapid and slow maxillary expansion showed similar stability in the long-term. |
---|---|
DOI: | 10.6084/m9.figshare.20043670 |