American journal of orthodontics and dentofacial orthopedics : official publication of the American Association of Orthodontists, its constituent societies, and the American Board of Orthodontics · 2014
Dentoskeletal effects of 3 maxillary expanders in patients with clefts: A cone-beam computed tomography study.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Figueiredo Daniel Santos Fonseca, Bartolomeo Flávia Uchôa Costa, Romualdo Camila Rodrigues, Palomo Juan Martin, Horta Martinho Campolina Rebello, Andrade Ildeu, Oliveira Dauro Douglas
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the skeletal and dental changes in the maxillae of patients with clefts treated with 3 expanders: hyrax, fan-type, and inverted mini-hyrax supported on the first premolars.
METHODS: Thirty patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate with transverse maxillary deficiency were divided into 3 groups, according to the type of expander that they used. Cone-beam computed tomography images were taken before and 3 months after expansion, and the paired t test was used to evaluate the changes in each group.
RESULTS: The subjects in the inverted mini-hyrax group showed significant forward displacement of the maxilla (P <0.05). On the transversal plane, the hyrax group showed greater expansion in the posterior region than in the anterior region (P <0.05). However, the fan-type and the inverted mini-hyrax groups showed significantly greater maxillary expansion anteriorly than posteriorly (P <0.05). There was a greater tendency for buccal inclination of the supporting teeth when the fan-type was used. The cleft and the noncleft sides expanded symmetrically with all appliances, and there was no difference in dental tipping between these sides (P >0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: The hyrax expander showed better results for cleft patients requiring anterior and posterior maxillary expansion. The inverted mini-hyrax most effectively restricted posterior expansion, optimizing anterior expansion without causing as much buccal tipping of the supporting teeth as did the fan-type.
METHODS: Thirty patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate with transverse maxillary deficiency were divided into 3 groups, according to the type of expander that they used. Cone-beam computed tomography images were taken before and 3 months after expansion, and the paired t test was used to evaluate the changes in each group.
RESULTS: The subjects in the inverted mini-hyrax group showed significant forward displacement of the maxilla (P <0.05). On the transversal plane, the hyrax group showed greater expansion in the posterior region than in the anterior region (P <0.05). However, the fan-type and the inverted mini-hyrax groups showed significantly greater maxillary expansion anteriorly than posteriorly (P <0.05). There was a greater tendency for buccal inclination of the supporting teeth when the fan-type was used. The cleft and the noncleft sides expanded symmetrically with all appliances, and there was no difference in dental tipping between these sides (P >0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: The hyrax expander showed better results for cleft patients requiring anterior and posterior maxillary expansion. The inverted mini-hyrax most effectively restricted posterior expansion, optimizing anterior expansion without causing as much buccal tipping of the supporting teeth as did the fan-type.