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...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:The Angle orthodontist 2010-09, Vol.80 (5), p.870-875
Hauptverfasser: Sökücü, Oral, Doruk, Cenk, Uysal, O Ismail
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 &lt; .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 &lt; .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 &amp; 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 &lt; .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 &lt; .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 &amp; 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 &amp; 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 &lt; .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 &lt; .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