Academic literature on the topic 'Slow maxillary expansion'

Transversal constriction of the maxilla is a common problem and may occur due to many reasons.The maxillary expansion procedures can be classified as rapid maxillary expansion (RME), semi-rapid maxillary expansion (SRME), and slow maxillary expansion (SME). In orthodontic treatment prosodure, it has been evaluated that it causes root resorption especially in the support teeth in many apparatus used for orthodontic treatment and in the expansion apparatus used in the treatment of transverse direction of maxilla. In this review, we aimed to evaluate maxiller expansion protocols and the methods of examining resorption in support teeth. How to cite this article: Topal R, Gündüz Arslan S. The maxillary expansion procedures, the types, and the root resorption analysis methods. Int Dent Res 2019;9(3):145-51. Linguistic Revision: The English in this manuscript has been checked by at least two professional editors, both native speakers of English.

Maxillary transverse insufficiency usually requires expansion of palate with a combination of orthopedic and orthodontic tooth movements. Four different types of maxillary expansion procedures are used: slow maxillary expansion (SME), rapid maxillary expansion (RME), miniscrew assisted rapid maxillary expansion (MARME), surgically assisted maxillary expansion (SARME). This article aims to review the maxillary expansion by all the rapid maxillary expansion modalities and a brief discussion on commonly used appliances.

One of the most common problems faced by an orthodontist while treating young as well as adult patients is the constricted maxillary arch. Expansion of the maxillary arch has been a topic of debate since centuries. The commonly used methods for constricted arch include slow maxillary expansion, rapid maxillary expansion and surgically assisted rapid palatal expansion (SARPE). Slow palatal expansion is a procedure to expand the maxillary arch in transverse dimension to correct the constricted maxillary arch with light forces. The following review article provides detailed information of various slow maxillary expansion appliances with their implications in orthodontics.

ABSTRACT OBJECTIVE: The aim of this randomized clinical trial was to evaluate the dental, dentoalveolar, and skeletal changes occurring right after the rapid maxillary expansion (RME) and slow maxillary expansion (SME) treatment using Haas-type expander. METHODS: All subjects performed cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) before installation of expanders (T1) and right after screw stabilization (T2). Patients who did not follow the research parameters were excluded. The final sample resulted in 21 patients in RME group (mean age of 8.43 years) and 16 patients in SME group (mean age of 8.70 years). Based on the skewness and kurtosis statistics, the variables were judged to be normally distributed and paired t-test and student t-test were performed at significance level of 5%. RESULTS: Intermolar angle changed significantly due to treatment and RME showed greater buccal tipping than SME. RME showed significant changes in other four measurements due to treatment: maxilla moved forward and mandible showed backward rotation and, at transversal level both skeletal and dentoalveolar showed significant changes due to maxillary expansion. SME showed significant dentoalveolar changes due to maxillary expansion. CONCLUSIONS: Only intermolar angle showed significant difference between the two modalities of maxillary expansion with greater buccal tipping for RME. Also, RME produced skeletal maxillary expansion and SME did not. Both maxillary expansion modalities were efficient to promote transversal gain at dentoalveolar level. Sagittal and vertical measurements did not show differences between groups, but RME promoted a forward movement of the maxilla and backward rotation of the mandible.

Maxillary expansion treatments have been used for more than a century to correct maxillary transverse deficiency. Three expansion treatment modalities are used today: rapid maxillary expansion (RME), slow maxillary expansion (SME) and surgically assisted maxillary expansion. Since each treatment modality has advantages and disadvantages, controversy regarding the use of each exists. Rapid Maxillary expansion or palatal expansion as it is sometimes called, occupies unique niche in dentofacial therapy. Rapid Maxillary expansion is a skeletal type of expansion that involves the separation of the mid-palatal suture and movement of the maxillary shelves away from each other.

Background and objectives: The aim of the present paper is to use low-dose computed tomography (CT) to evaluate the changes in the midpalatal suture density in patients treated with rapid maxillary expansion (RME) and slow maxillary expansion (SME). Materials and Methods: Thirty patients (mean age 10.2 ± 1.2 years) were retrospectively selected from the existing sample of a previous study. For each patient, a low-dose computed tomography examination was performed before appliance placement (T0) and at the end of retention (T1), seven months later. Using the collected images, the midpalatal suture density was evaluated in six regions of interest. Results: No significant differences were found between the timepoints in the rapid maxillary expansion group. Three out of six regions of interest showed significant decreases between the timepoints in the slow maxillary expansion group. No significant differences were found in comparisons between the two groups. Conclusions: The midpalatal suture density showed no significant differences when rapid maxillary expansion groups were compared to slow maxillary expansion groups, suggesting that a similar rate of suture reorganization occurs despite different expansion protocols.

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.

A combination of orthopaedic and orthodontic tooth movements are required for expansion of palate to correct maxillary transverse discrepancy. Expansion of the palate can be achieved by three different treatment methods mainly Rapid maxillary expansion, slow maxillary expansion and surgically assisted maxillary expansion. Among the different methods rapid maxillary expansion brings about significant changes in the dental transverse measurements (Agarwal A, Mathur R International journal of clinical pediatric dentistry 2010). This article aims to review the various appliances used for maxillary expansion.

Introduction: The objective of this study was to compare the dentoskeletal effects of the slow (SME) and rapid maxillary expansion (RME) in patients with bilateral complete cleft lip and palate (BCLP). Methods: The sample comprised 46 patients with BCLP (34 male and 12 female) with a mean age of 9,2 years. They were randomly assigned into two groups: Group RME comprised 23 patients with posterior crossbites treated with Hyrax or Haas appliances. Group SME comprised 23 patients with posterior crossbites treated with quad-helix appliance. Both expansion modalities were performed prior to secondary alveolar bone graft procedure. Conebeam computed tomography (CBCT) was performed before expansion (T1) and after appliance removal at the end of a 6-month retention period (T2). Sagittal and vertical changes were evaluated using the cephalometric reformatted images that were obtained from the CBCT. Cephalometric analysis was performed using Dolphin Imaging Software (Chatsworth, CA, USA). Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was used to calculate intraexaminer agreement. Intragroup changes were evaluated using paired t test. Intergroup comparisons were performed using t test (p<0.05). Results: The intraexaminer agreement was excellent (ICC varied from 0.88 to 0.96). RME group showed a significant increase of lower anterior facial height (p=0.042), mandibular length (p= 0.003) and maxillomandibular difference (p=0.006). SLM group demonstrated an increase of mandibular length (p<0.001) and maxillomandibular difference (p<0.001) and a decrease of the ANB angle (p=0.034). No significant differences between RME and SME were found. Conclusions: Rapid and slow maxillary expansion produced similar sagittal and vertical changes in patients with BCLP
Introdução: O objetivo desse estudo foi comparar os efeitos dentoesqueléticos da expansão lenta (ELM) e expansão rápida (ERM) da maxila em pacientes com fissuras labiopalatinas completa e bilateral (FLPCB). Métodos: A amostra compreendeu 46 pacientes com FLPCB (34 do sexo masculino e 12 do feminino) com idade média de 9,2 anos. Eles foram aleatoriamente alocados em dois grupos: Grupo ERM compreendeu 23 pacientes com mordida cruzada posterior (MCP) tratados com aparelho Hyrax ou Haas. Grupo ELM compreendeu 23 pacientes com MCP e tratados com aparelho quadrihélice. Ambas as modadlidades de expansão foram realizadas previamente ao enxerto ósseo alveolar secundário. Tomografia computadorizada de feixe cônico (TCFC) foi realizada antes da expansão (T1) e após a remoção do aparelho, no fim do período de contenção de 6 meses (T2). Alterações anteroposteriores e verticais foram mensuradas em imagens cefalométricas reformatadas a partir da TCFC. A análise cefalométricas foi realizada usando o Software Dolphin Imaging® (Chatsworth, CA, EUA). O coeficiente de correlação intraclasse (CCI) foi usado para calcular o erro do método. Alterações intragrupo foram calculadas usando teste t pareado. Alterações intergrupo foram calculadas usando teste t (p<0,05). Resultados: A confiabilidade foi considerada excelente (CCI variou entre 0,88 a 0,96). O grupo ERM demonstrou aumento significativo na altura facial anterior inferior (p=0,042), no comprimento mandibular (p<0,003) e na diferença maxilo-mandibular (p=0,006). O grupo ELM mostrou aumento no comprimento mandibular (p<0,001) na diferença maxilomandibular (p<0,001) e uma redução do ângulo ANB (p=0,034). Não foram encontradas diferenças entre ERM e ELM. Conclusões: Expansão rápida e lenta da maxila produziram alterações cefalométricas sagitais e verticais semelhantes em pacientes com FLPCB

Scopo del lavoro: valutare le modificazioni trasversali delle arcate ottenuti con un’espansione lenta, con forze leggere ed alto controllo del movimento, su un campione di pazienti in crescita, con insufficienza trasversale del mascellare. Materiali e Metodi: sono stati inclusi nello studio n° 10 pazienti (n° 3 maschi, n° 7 femmine) con un’età media di 7 anni 5 mesi +/- 7 mesi, trattati con espansione mascellare lenta per la correzione di crossbite posteriore monolaterale (con shift mandibolare), mediante il dispositivo denominato Leaf Expander (L.E.), ancorato sui secondi molari decidui. Su questo campione di n°10 pazienti sono stati eseguiti due diversi Studi Pilota. - Studio Pilota I In tutti i pazienti (n°10) sono stati realizzati modelli digitali delle arcate dentarie prima dell’inizio del trattamento (T1) e a fine terapia, al momento della rimozione dell’espansore L.E. (T2). I modelli sono stati analizzati rilevando n°5 parametri lineari: 1) distanza intermolare sup. (molari permanenti) 2) distanza intermolare sup. (molari decidui) 3) distanza intercanina superiore 4) distanza intermolare inferiore (molari permanenti) 5) distanza intercanina inferiore - Studio Pilota II In n° 5 pazienti, con deficit di spazio a carico dei canini superiori, è stata effettuata una tomografia computerizzata cone beam (CBCT) prima dell’inizio del trattamento (T1), seguita da una CBCT al momento della rimozione del L.E. (T2). Sono state eseguite misurazioni e sovrapposizioni al fine di valutare n° 3 parametri, i più significativi secondo la letteratura: 1) ampiezza nasale 2) ampiezza mascellare a livello dei II molari decidui 3) ampiezza mascellare a livello di primi molari permanenti Risultati: In tutti i pazienti si è realizzata la correzione del crossbite posteriore, con 4 mesi di trattamento in media. Tutti i parametri oggetto di valutazione, dentali e scheletrici, relativi all’arcata superiore, sono aumentati significativamente durante la fase di espansione lenta mascellare. Il percorso eruttivo e la prognosi dei canini inclusi risultano migliorati. Per quanto riguarda l’arcata mandibolare abbiamo rilevato la riduzione del diametro intermolare 6-6 e l’incremento del diametro intercanino. Conclusioni: i risultati dei due Studi Pilota convalidano l’efficacia dell’espansore lento Leaf Expander, nel trattamento delle insufficienze trasversali del mascellare, nel giovane paziente, con azione sia dentoalveolare sia scheletrica.
Aim of the researche: The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare the dental and bone effects of slow maxillary expansion, with low forces and hight movement control, in a sample of young patients with unilateral transversal maxillary deficiency, with mandibular shift. Materials and method: have been included in the study 10 patients (n° 3 male, n° 7 female) with an average age of 7.5 yrs +/- 7, treated with a slow maxillary expansion by Leaf Expander appliance . - Pilot Study I: for all ten patients, the digital models have been made at the beginning of the therapy (T1), at the end of expansion (T2). Five parameters have been measured with the cast analysis: 1) the distance between the first upper permanent molars 2) the distance between the upper second deciduous molars 3) the distance between the upper canine cusps 4) the distance between the lowers molars 5) the distance of the lower canine cusps. - Pilot Study II: for only 5 patients, with loss of space for upper cusps, a cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) have been performed at the beginning of the therapy (T1) and after expansion (L.E. remotion) (T2). Misurations and superimpositions have been performed to evaluate the three parameters, most relevant on basis of literature: 1) nasal width 2) basal bone 3) intermolar diameter at II deciduous molars Results: In all the patients the complete correction of posterior crossbite has been achieved in 4 monts, on average. Significant increases in the dental and skeletal transversal diameters were obtained with slow maxillary expansion. Increases were also obtained about anterior mandibular arch (+ 1mm). Conclusions: the Pilot Studys performed confirm the soundness of Leaf Expander appliance in the transversal deficiency correction with a both dental-alveolar and skelectal action in the treatment of young patients.