Skeletal effects of posterior crossbite treatment with either quad helix or rapid maxillary expansion: a randomized controlled trial with 1-year follow-up

6Citations
Citations of this article
33Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Objectives: To assess skeletal and dental effects and evaluate possible side effects of maxillary expansion with two different appliances, directly after expansion and 1 year postexpansion. Materials and Methods: Forty-two patients with unilateral posterior crossbite (mean 9.5 6 0.9 years) were randomized to either rapid maxillary expansion (RME) banded on the deciduous second molars and bonded to the primary canines or slow expansion with quad helix (QH) on the permanent first molars. Cone-beam computed tomography records were taken at baseline, directly after correction of the posterior crossbite and at follow-up 1 year after expansion. Results: All patients were analyzed. RME opened the midpalatal suture more anteriorly and inferiorly (mean 4.1 mm) and less posteriorly and superiorly (mean 1.0 mm). No effect on midpalatal suture could be shown in the QH group after expansion, P, .001. Buccal bone width had significantly decreased (P, .001) in the QH group compared with the RME group. Buccal fenestrations and root resorption on the left first molar had a higher prevalence directly after expansion finished in the QH group (P = .0086, P = .013) but were not significant at 1-year follow-up (P = .11, P = .22). Conclusions: Opening of the suture with RME was more anterior and inferior, and the QH did not open the midpalatal suture at all. More buccal bone loss and fenestrations were seen on the permanent first molar in patients treated with conventional QH than RME anchored to deciduous teeth.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Hansson, S., Josefsson, E., Lund, H., Miranda-Bazargani, S., Magnuson, A., Lindsten, R., & Bazargani, F. (2024). Skeletal effects of posterior crossbite treatment with either quad helix or rapid maxillary expansion: a randomized controlled trial with 1-year follow-up. Angle Orthodontist, 94(5), 512–521. https://doi.org/10.2319/010424-9.1

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free