Objective: To examine the dimensional changes after rapid maxillary expansion (RME) carried out in the transitional dentition with the primary teeth as anchorage. Materials and Methods: Group A was composed of 31 consecutive transitional dentition patients with posterior quadrant crossbites treated with a Haas-type RME appliance anchored on the maxillary primary molars and canines. No treatment was administered after palatal expansion. Study models were made before RME (T1), at appliance removal (T2), and at least 1 year after appliance removal (T3). A control sample of 60 individuals with posterior quadrant crossbites who had had no orthodontic treatment was categorized into group B (30 individuals with an average age comparable with the treated patients at T2) and group C (30 individuals with an average age comparable with the treated patients at T3). Results: Permanent molar crossbites were corrected at T2, and this correction was maintained at T3 in all patients. The mean permanent maxillary intermolar width was 42.6 ± 2.3 mm at T1, 46.7 ± 1.9 mm at T2 (P < .01), and 46.3 ± 1.8 mm at T3 (P < .01) in group A; 42.9 ± 2.7 mm (P < .01) in group B; and 44.4 ± 3.0 (P < .01) in group C. Premolar and canine widths were slightly wider than the control at T3. Conclusion: To avoid undesirable treatment-induced effects on maxillary permanent molars, a stable transverse correction could be achieved with the RME appliance anchored on the primary teeth. © 2007 by The EH Angle Education and Research Foundation, Inc.
Arch width changes with a rapid maxillary expansion appliance anchored to the primary teeth
SICILIANI, Giuseppe
2007
Abstract
Objective: To examine the dimensional changes after rapid maxillary expansion (RME) carried out in the transitional dentition with the primary teeth as anchorage. Materials and Methods: Group A was composed of 31 consecutive transitional dentition patients with posterior quadrant crossbites treated with a Haas-type RME appliance anchored on the maxillary primary molars and canines. No treatment was administered after palatal expansion. Study models were made before RME (T1), at appliance removal (T2), and at least 1 year after appliance removal (T3). A control sample of 60 individuals with posterior quadrant crossbites who had had no orthodontic treatment was categorized into group B (30 individuals with an average age comparable with the treated patients at T2) and group C (30 individuals with an average age comparable with the treated patients at T3). Results: Permanent molar crossbites were corrected at T2, and this correction was maintained at T3 in all patients. The mean permanent maxillary intermolar width was 42.6 ± 2.3 mm at T1, 46.7 ± 1.9 mm at T2 (P < .01), and 46.3 ± 1.8 mm at T3 (P < .01) in group A; 42.9 ± 2.7 mm (P < .01) in group B; and 44.4 ± 3.0 (P < .01) in group C. Premolar and canine widths were slightly wider than the control at T3. Conclusion: To avoid undesirable treatment-induced effects on maxillary permanent molars, a stable transverse correction could be achieved with the RME appliance anchored on the primary teeth. © 2007 by The EH Angle Education and Research Foundation, Inc.I documenti in SFERA sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
