scholarly journals Evaluation of root resorption following rapid maxillary expansion using cone-beam computed tomography

2012 ◽  
Vol 82 (3) ◽  
pp. 488-494 ◽  
Author(s):  
Asli Baysal ◽  
Irfan Karadede ◽  
Seyit Hekimoglu ◽  
Faruk Ucar ◽  
Törün Ozer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Computed Tomography ◽  
Cone Beam Computed Tomography ◽  
Root Resorption ◽  
Rapid Maxillary Expansion ◽  
Cone Beam ◽  
Maxillary Expansion

scholarly journals Upper airway expansion after rapid maxillary expansion evaluated with cone beam computed tomography

2012 ◽  
Vol 82 (3) ◽  
pp. 458-463 ◽  
Author(s):  
Annelise Nazareth Cunha Ribeiro ◽  
João Batista de Paiva ◽  
José Rino-Neto ◽  
Edson Illipronti-Filho ◽  
Tarcila Trivino ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Computed Tomography ◽  
Cone Beam Computed Tomography ◽  
Upper Airway ◽  
Rapid Maxillary Expansion ◽  
Cone Beam ◽  
Maxillary Expansion

scholarly journals Rapid Maxillary Expansion and Upper Airway Morphology: A Systematic Review on the Role of Cone Beam Computed Tomography

2017 ◽  
Vol 2017 ◽  
pp. 1-10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gabriele Di Carlo ◽  
Matteo Saccucci ◽  
Gaetano Ierardo ◽  
Valeria Luzzi ◽  
Francesca Occasi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Computed Tomography ◽  
Cone Beam Computed Tomography ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Upper Airway ◽  
Rapid Maxillary Expansion ◽  
Cone Beam ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Maxillary Expansion ◽  
Screening Process ◽  
Airway Morphology

Objective. This study aimed to investigate the quality of cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) studies evaluating the effects of rapid maxillary expansion on upper airway morphology. Materials and Methods. A database search was conducted using PubMed, Ovid, and Cochrane Library up to December 2016. Studies in which CBCT was adopted to visualize the upper airway before and after rapid maxillary expansion were included. The population target was growing patients. Methodological quality assessment was performed. Results. The screening process resulted in the exclusion of 1079 references, resulting in only 9 remaining papers that fulfilled the inclusion criteria. No randomized clinical trials were found. The quality scores ranged from 36% to 68% of the maximum achievable, and the mean quality score of the studies was 50%. No good quality studies were detected in our sample. Conclusions. Inconsistencies in the CBCT protocols utilized were detected between studies. Head posture, tongue position, and segmentation protocols were not consistent. These discrepancies were reflected in the different results obtained in the studies. A valid and consistent protocol with regard to head and tongue positioning, as well as nasal cavity volume segmentation, is required.

scholarly journals Three-Dimensional Prospective Evaluation of Piezocision-Assisted and Conventional Rapid Maxillary Expansion: A Controlled Clinical Trial

2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 127-133
Author(s):  
Ahmed I. Abdul-Aziz ◽  
Wael M. Refai
Keyword(s):  
Computed Tomography ◽  
Cone Beam Computed Tomography ◽  
Treatment Time ◽  
Rapid Maxillary Expansion ◽  
Cone Beam ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
Controlled Clinical Trial ◽  
Maxillary Expansion ◽  
Posterior Crossbite ◽  
Significant Difference

BACKGROUND: Piezocision-assisted orthodontics (PAO) is considered one of the modern techniques aiming at reducing the treatment time and overcoming some limitations of orthodontic treatment. The use of piezocision as an adjunct in the treatment of posterior crossbite is limited, so additional research in this area is required. AIM: To three-dimensionally compare the skeletal and dental effects produced by piezocision-assisted rapid maxillary expansion (PARME) and conventional rapid maxillary expansion (RME) using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This prospective controlled study comprised 14 consecutive non-syndromic patients with posterior crossbite. In 7 patients (mean age = 16.1 ± 0.3 years), PARME was used to correct the crossbite; whereas in the remaining 7 (mean age = 15.9 ± 0.5 years), RME was done. Cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) scans were performed before expansion (T1) and 3 months later after expansion (T2) to compare the skeletal and dental effects produced by the two expansion techniques. Transverse skeletal, dentolinear, and dentoangular variables at the level of maxillary first and second premolars and maxillary first molars were measured and compared within and between groups using the appropriate statistical test. RESULTS: For the transverse skeletal variables, PARME showed a non-significant increase; whereas, RME showed a significant increase. Regarding the dentolinear measurements, a significant increase in coronal widths and an insignificant increase in apical widths was seen in PARME, whereas, the RME showed a non-significant increase for both coronal and apical widths. Non-significant decreases (protrusion of teeth) in the dentoangular measurements were seen in both groups. Between-group comparisons showed a non-significant difference except for the dentolinear coronal widths. CONCLUSION: PARME is effective in treating posterior crossbite. Because of the more dental expansion produced by PARME as compared to the conventional RME, PARME should be limited only to mild or moderate not severe forms of palatal constriction. The available evidence regarding the effectiveness of corticotomy- and/or piezocision-assisted maxillary expansion for correction of posterior crossbite is limited and inadequate.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document