Comparison of the effects of RME and fan-type RME on nasal airway by using acoustic rhinometry
To evaluate and compare the nasal airway changes following rapid maxillary expansion (RME) and fan-type RME using acoustic rhinometry (AR). The study sample consisted of three groups. The RME group comprised 15 subjects with maxillary transverse discrepancies and posterior crossbites. The fan-type R...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | The Angle orthodontist 2010-09, Vol.80 (5), p.870-875 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 875 |
---|---|
container_issue | 5 |
container_start_page | 870 |
container_title | The Angle orthodontist |
container_volume | 80 |
creator | Sökücü, Oral Doruk, Cenk Uysal, O Ismail |
description | To evaluate and compare the nasal airway changes following rapid maxillary expansion (RME) and fan-type RME using acoustic rhinometry (AR).
The study sample consisted of three groups. The RME group comprised 15 subjects with maxillary transverse discrepancies and posterior crossbites. The fan-type RME group comprised 15 subjects, who had an anteriorly constricted maxilla with a normal intermolar width. The third group included 15 patients who had an ideal occlusion and received no orthodontic treatment and served as the control group. AR was used to measure nasal volume and the minimal cross-sectional area (MCA) before expansion (T1), after expansion (T2), and 6 months after expansion (T3). Each AR recording was performed with and without the use of a decongestant. Two-way analysis of variance was used to determine differences among the groups and three-way analysis of variance was used for the differences between groups. If evidence of statistically significant differences was found, a Bonferroni test was used.
The results showed that nasal volume and MCA were significantly increased with RME and fan-type RME immediately after expansion (P < .05). At the end of retention, nasal volume and MCA values of RME showed significant differences with both expansion fan-type RME and control groups (P < .05).
RME and fan-type RME had similar effects on the nasal airway immediately after expansion. The increase in nasal volume and MCA was more stable in the RME group than in the fan-type RME group at the end of the retention period. |
doi_str_mv | 10.2319/120309-694.1 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_8939021</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>733459164</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c379t-4b2421f87688da580e8e7c832d77e133a72ec9301fc93561ab52ec62e934eaab3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpVkU1PHDEMhiPUCra0N85Vbr0wkI_JJLlUqlZQKoEqVXBt5Ml62KCZZJvMFs2_72wXEFxs2X712NZLyAlnZ0Jye84Fk8xWja3P-AFZcFurSnMm35EFY0xWUnB7RD6U8sCYUKoWh-RIMKWNUXpBfi_TsIEcSoo0dXRcI8WuQz-WXfnr5oJCXNEOYjVOG_zfmJURCvQUQn6EibYT3ZYQ7yn4tC1j8DSvQ0wDjnn6SN530Bf89JSPyd3lxe3yqrr--f3H8tt15aW2Y1W3oha8M7oxZgXKMDSovZFipTVyKUEL9FYy3s1RNRxaNTcagVbWCNDKY_J1z91s2wFXHuOYoXebHAbIk0sQ3NtJDGt3n_46Y6Vlgs-AL0-AnP5ssYxuCMVj30PE-SunpayV5U09K0_3Sp9TKRm7ly2cuZ0jbu-Imx1xO_Dn15e9iJ8tkP8AYZeGrw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>733459164</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Comparison of the effects of RME and fan-type RME on nasal airway by using acoustic rhinometry</title><source>PubMed (Medline)</source><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Directory of Open Access Journals</source><source>EZB Electronic Journals Library</source><creator>Sökücü, Oral ; Doruk, Cenk ; Uysal, O Ismail</creator><creatorcontrib>Sökücü, Oral ; Doruk, Cenk ; Uysal, O Ismail</creatorcontrib><description>To evaluate and compare the nasal airway changes following rapid maxillary expansion (RME) and fan-type RME using acoustic rhinometry (AR).
The study sample consisted of three groups. The RME group comprised 15 subjects with maxillary transverse discrepancies and posterior crossbites. The fan-type RME group comprised 15 subjects, who had an anteriorly constricted maxilla with a normal intermolar width. The third group included 15 patients who had an ideal occlusion and received no orthodontic treatment and served as the control group. AR was used to measure nasal volume and the minimal cross-sectional area (MCA) before expansion (T1), after expansion (T2), and 6 months after expansion (T3). Each AR recording was performed with and without the use of a decongestant. Two-way analysis of variance was used to determine differences among the groups and three-way analysis of variance was used for the differences between groups. If evidence of statistically significant differences was found, a Bonferroni test was used.
The results showed that nasal volume and MCA were significantly increased with RME and fan-type RME immediately after expansion (P < .05). At the end of retention, nasal volume and MCA values of RME showed significant differences with both expansion fan-type RME and control groups (P < .05).
RME and fan-type RME had similar effects on the nasal airway immediately after expansion. The increase in nasal volume and MCA was more stable in the RME group than in the fan-type RME group at the end of the retention period.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0003-3219</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1945-7103</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1945-7103</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.2319/120309-694.1</identifier><identifier>PMID: 20578857</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Edward H Angle Education and Research Foundation, Inc</publisher><subject>Airway Resistance - physiology ; Anatomy, Cross-Sectional ; Child ; Cuspid - pathology ; Dental Arch - pathology ; Female ; Follow-Up Studies ; Humans ; Male ; Malocclusion - pathology ; Malocclusion - therapy ; Maxilla - pathology ; Molar - pathology ; Nasal Cavity - pathology ; Nasal Decongestants - administration & dosage ; Nose - pathology ; Original ; Orthodontic Appliance Design ; Orthodontic Retainers ; Palatal Expansion Technique - classification ; Palatal Expansion Technique - instrumentation ; Pulmonary Ventilation - physiology ; Recurrence ; Rhinometry, Acoustic</subject><ispartof>The Angle orthodontist, 2010-09, Vol.80 (5), p.870-875</ispartof><rights>2010 by The EH Angle Education and Research Foundation, Inc. 2010</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c379t-4b2421f87688da580e8e7c832d77e133a72ec9301fc93561ab52ec62e934eaab3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c379t-4b2421f87688da580e8e7c832d77e133a72ec9301fc93561ab52ec62e934eaab3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8939021/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8939021/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,864,885,27922,27923,53789,53791</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20578857$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Sökücü, Oral</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Doruk, Cenk</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Uysal, O Ismail</creatorcontrib><title>Comparison of the effects of RME and fan-type RME on nasal airway by using acoustic rhinometry</title><title>The Angle orthodontist</title><addtitle>Angle Orthod</addtitle><description>To evaluate and compare the nasal airway changes following rapid maxillary expansion (RME) and fan-type RME using acoustic rhinometry (AR).
The study sample consisted of three groups. The RME group comprised 15 subjects with maxillary transverse discrepancies and posterior crossbites. The fan-type RME group comprised 15 subjects, who had an anteriorly constricted maxilla with a normal intermolar width. The third group included 15 patients who had an ideal occlusion and received no orthodontic treatment and served as the control group. AR was used to measure nasal volume and the minimal cross-sectional area (MCA) before expansion (T1), after expansion (T2), and 6 months after expansion (T3). Each AR recording was performed with and without the use of a decongestant. Two-way analysis of variance was used to determine differences among the groups and three-way analysis of variance was used for the differences between groups. If evidence of statistically significant differences was found, a Bonferroni test was used.
The results showed that nasal volume and MCA were significantly increased with RME and fan-type RME immediately after expansion (P < .05). At the end of retention, nasal volume and MCA values of RME showed significant differences with both expansion fan-type RME and control groups (P < .05).
RME and fan-type RME had similar effects on the nasal airway immediately after expansion. The increase in nasal volume and MCA was more stable in the RME group than in the fan-type RME group at the end of the retention period.</description><subject>Airway Resistance - physiology</subject><subject>Anatomy, Cross-Sectional</subject><subject>Child</subject><subject>Cuspid - pathology</subject><subject>Dental Arch - pathology</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Follow-Up Studies</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Malocclusion - pathology</subject><subject>Malocclusion - therapy</subject><subject>Maxilla - pathology</subject><subject>Molar - pathology</subject><subject>Nasal Cavity - pathology</subject><subject>Nasal Decongestants - administration & dosage</subject><subject>Nose - pathology</subject><subject>Original</subject><subject>Orthodontic Appliance Design</subject><subject>Orthodontic Retainers</subject><subject>Palatal Expansion Technique - classification</subject><subject>Palatal Expansion Technique - instrumentation</subject><subject>Pulmonary Ventilation - physiology</subject><subject>Recurrence</subject><subject>Rhinometry, Acoustic</subject><issn>0003-3219</issn><issn>1945-7103</issn><issn>1945-7103</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2010</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNpVkU1PHDEMhiPUCra0N85Vbr0wkI_JJLlUqlZQKoEqVXBt5Ml62KCZZJvMFs2_72wXEFxs2X712NZLyAlnZ0Jye84Fk8xWja3P-AFZcFurSnMm35EFY0xWUnB7RD6U8sCYUKoWh-RIMKWNUXpBfi_TsIEcSoo0dXRcI8WuQz-WXfnr5oJCXNEOYjVOG_zfmJURCvQUQn6EibYT3ZYQ7yn4tC1j8DSvQ0wDjnn6SN530Bf89JSPyd3lxe3yqrr--f3H8tt15aW2Y1W3oha8M7oxZgXKMDSovZFipTVyKUEL9FYy3s1RNRxaNTcagVbWCNDKY_J1z91s2wFXHuOYoXebHAbIk0sQ3NtJDGt3n_46Y6Vlgs-AL0-AnP5ssYxuCMVj30PE-SunpayV5U09K0_3Sp9TKRm7ly2cuZ0jbu-Imx1xO_Dn15e9iJ8tkP8AYZeGrw</recordid><startdate>201009</startdate><enddate>201009</enddate><creator>Sökücü, Oral</creator><creator>Doruk, Cenk</creator><creator>Uysal, O Ismail</creator><general>Edward H Angle Education and Research Foundation, Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201009</creationdate><title>Comparison of the effects of RME and fan-type RME on nasal airway by using acoustic rhinometry</title><author>Sökücü, Oral ; Doruk, Cenk ; Uysal, O Ismail</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c379t-4b2421f87688da580e8e7c832d77e133a72ec9301fc93561ab52ec62e934eaab3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2010</creationdate><topic>Airway Resistance - physiology</topic><topic>Anatomy, Cross-Sectional</topic><topic>Child</topic><topic>Cuspid - pathology</topic><topic>Dental Arch - pathology</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Follow-Up Studies</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Malocclusion - pathology</topic><topic>Malocclusion - therapy</topic><topic>Maxilla - pathology</topic><topic>Molar - pathology</topic><topic>Nasal Cavity - pathology</topic><topic>Nasal Decongestants - administration & dosage</topic><topic>Nose - pathology</topic><topic>Original</topic><topic>Orthodontic Appliance Design</topic><topic>Orthodontic Retainers</topic><topic>Palatal Expansion Technique - classification</topic><topic>Palatal Expansion Technique - instrumentation</topic><topic>Pulmonary Ventilation - physiology</topic><topic>Recurrence</topic><topic>Rhinometry, Acoustic</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Sökücü, Oral</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Doruk, Cenk</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Uysal, O Ismail</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>The Angle orthodontist</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Sökücü, Oral</au><au>Doruk, Cenk</au><au>Uysal, O Ismail</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Comparison of the effects of RME and fan-type RME on nasal airway by using acoustic rhinometry</atitle><jtitle>The Angle orthodontist</jtitle><addtitle>Angle Orthod</addtitle><date>2010-09</date><risdate>2010</risdate><volume>80</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>870</spage><epage>875</epage><pages>870-875</pages><issn>0003-3219</issn><issn>1945-7103</issn><eissn>1945-7103</eissn><abstract>To evaluate and compare the nasal airway changes following rapid maxillary expansion (RME) and fan-type RME using acoustic rhinometry (AR).
The study sample consisted of three groups. The RME group comprised 15 subjects with maxillary transverse discrepancies and posterior crossbites. The fan-type RME group comprised 15 subjects, who had an anteriorly constricted maxilla with a normal intermolar width. The third group included 15 patients who had an ideal occlusion and received no orthodontic treatment and served as the control group. AR was used to measure nasal volume and the minimal cross-sectional area (MCA) before expansion (T1), after expansion (T2), and 6 months after expansion (T3). Each AR recording was performed with and without the use of a decongestant. Two-way analysis of variance was used to determine differences among the groups and three-way analysis of variance was used for the differences between groups. If evidence of statistically significant differences was found, a Bonferroni test was used.
The results showed that nasal volume and MCA were significantly increased with RME and fan-type RME immediately after expansion (P < .05). At the end of retention, nasal volume and MCA values of RME showed significant differences with both expansion fan-type RME and control groups (P < .05).
RME and fan-type RME had similar effects on the nasal airway immediately after expansion. The increase in nasal volume and MCA was more stable in the RME group than in the fan-type RME group at the end of the retention period.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Edward H Angle Education and Research Foundation, Inc</pub><pmid>20578857</pmid><doi>10.2319/120309-694.1</doi><tpages>6</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0003-3219 |
ispartof | The Angle orthodontist, 2010-09, Vol.80 (5), p.870-875 |
issn | 0003-3219 1945-7103 1945-7103 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_8939021 |
source | PubMed (Medline); MEDLINE; Directory of Open Access Journals; EZB Electronic Journals Library |
subjects | Airway Resistance - physiology Anatomy, Cross-Sectional Child Cuspid - pathology Dental Arch - pathology Female Follow-Up Studies Humans Male Malocclusion - pathology Malocclusion - therapy Maxilla - pathology Molar - pathology Nasal Cavity - pathology Nasal Decongestants - administration & dosage Nose - pathology Original Orthodontic Appliance Design Orthodontic Retainers Palatal Expansion Technique - classification Palatal Expansion Technique - instrumentation Pulmonary Ventilation - physiology Recurrence Rhinometry, Acoustic |
title | Comparison of the effects of RME and fan-type RME on nasal airway by using acoustic rhinometry |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-14T16%3A55%3A32IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Comparison%20of%20the%20effects%20of%20RME%20and%20fan-type%20RME%20on%20nasal%20airway%20by%20using%20acoustic%20rhinometry&rft.jtitle=The%20Angle%20orthodontist&rft.au=S%C3%B6k%C3%BCc%C3%BC,%20Oral&rft.date=2010-09&rft.volume=80&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=870&rft.epage=875&rft.pages=870-875&rft.issn=0003-3219&rft.eissn=1945-7103&rft_id=info:doi/10.2319/120309-694.1&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E733459164%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=733459164&rft_id=info:pmid/20578857&rfr_iscdi=true |