Comparison of the Changes Following Two Treatment Approaches: Rapid Maxillary Expansion Versus Alternate Rapid Maxillary Expansion and Constriction

celikdelen, murat; celebi, fatih

doi:10.5152/TurkJOrthod.2020.19023

Comparison of the Changes Following Two Treatment Approaches: Rapid Maxillary Expansion Versus Alternate Rapid Maxillary Expansion and Constriction

Fatih ÇELEBİ, (Tokat Gaziosmanpaşa Üniversitesi, Diş Hekimliği Fakültesi, Ortodonti Anabilim Dalı, Tokat, Türkiye)

Murat ÇELİKDELEN (Girilmemişş)

Turkish Journal of Orthodontics

1 1

Yıl: 2020 Cilt: 33 Sayı: 1 Sayfa Aralığı: 1 - 7 Metin Dili: İngilizce DOI: 10.5152/TurkJOrthod.2020.19023 İndeks Tarihi: 21-10-2020

Comparison of the Changes Following Two Treatment Approaches: Rapid Maxillary Expansion Versus Alternate Rapid Maxillary Expansion and Constriction

Öz:

Objective: The aim of the present study was to evaluate the hard and soft tissue changes following rapid maxillary expansion (RME) and alternate rapid maxillary expansion and constriction (Alt-RAMEC) therapies.Methods: A total of 54 patients who needed maxillary expansion or Alt-RAMEC procedure were recruited and divided into two groups (27 subjects in the RME group and 27 subjects in the Alt-RAMEC group). Expansion screw was activated 0.5 mm/day (2 turns/day) in the RME group. Approximately 11 mm of expansion was achieved. In the Alt-RAMEC group, the screw was activated 1 mm/day (4 turns/day) during a period of 4 weeks. In the first and third weeks, the screw was opened; in the second and fourth weeks, the screw was closed. Cephalometric tracing and analyzing were done with the aid of digital software. Lateral cephalometric radiographs were obtained before (T0) and after (T1) RME and Alt-RAMEC applications.Results: In the RME group, the maxilla moved forward and downward. Upper incisor retrusion was observed according to the refer-ence planes. In addition, the tip of the nose moved forward, and the upper lip moved downward. In the Alt-RAMEC group, the naso-labial angle became more obtuse, and the stomion superius moved backward and downward.Conclusion: RME therapy resulted in skeletal and dental changes in the maxilla and related structures, favoring a contribution to solving Class III problems. No remarkable changes were recorded in the Alt-RAMEC group.

Anahtar Kelime:

Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık

1. Haas AJ. The treatment of maxillary deficiency by opening the midpalatal suture. Angle Orthod 1965; 35: 200-17.
2. Haas AJ. Palatal expansion: just the beginning of dentofacial orthopedics. Am J Orthod 1970; 57: 219-55. [CrossRef]
3. Williams MD, Sarver DM, Sadowsky PL, Bradley E. Combined rapid maxillary expansion and protraction facemask in the treatment of Class III malocclusions in growing children: A prospective longterm study. Semin Orthod 1997; 3: 265-74. [CrossRef]
4. Ngan P, Yiu C, Hu A, Hagg U, Wei SH, Gunel E. Cephalometric and occlusal changes following maxillary expansion and protraction. Eur J Orthod 1998; 20: 237-54. [CrossRef]
5. Alcan T, Keles A, Erverdi N. The effects of a modified protraction headgear on maxilla. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2000; 117: 27-38. [CrossRef]
6. Baccetti T, McGill JS, Franchi L, McNamara JA Jr, Tollaro I. Skeletal effects of early treatment of Class III malocclusion with maxillary expansion and face-mask therapy. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1998; 113: 333-43. [CrossRef]
7. Turley PK. Orthopedic correction of Class III malocclusion: retention and phase II therapy. J Clin Orthod 1996; 30: 313-24.
8. Haas AJ. The non-surgical treatment of the skeletal Class III. In: Book of Abstract. American Association of Orthodontists. 100th Annual Session; Chicago, Ill, April 29-May 3, 2000; 85.
9. Liou EJ, Tsai WC. A new protocol for maxillary protraction in cleft patients: repetitive weekly protocol of alternate rapid maxillary expansions and constrictions. Cleft Palate Craniofac J 2005; 42: 121-7. [CrossRef]
10. Liou EJ. Effective maxillary orthopedic protraction for growing Class III patients: a clinical application simulates distraction osteogenesis. Prog Orthod 2005; 6: 154-71.
11. Liou EJ. Toothborne orthopedic maxillary protraction in Class III patients. J Clin Orthod 2005; 39: 68-75.
12. Isci D, Turk T, Elekdag Turk S. Activation-deactivation rapid palatal expansion and reverse headgear in Class III cases. Eur J Orthod 2010; 32: 706-15. [CrossRef]
13. Chung CH, Font B. Skeletal and dental changes in the sagittal, vertical, and transverse dimensions after rapid palatal expansion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2004; 126: 569-75. [CrossRef]
14. Baratieri C, Alves M Jr, Bolognese AM, Nojima MC, Nojima LI. Changes in skeletal and dental relationship in Class II Division I malocclusion after rapid maxillary expansion: a prospective study. Dental Press J Orthod 2014; 19: 75-81. [CrossRef]
15. Lagravere MO, Major PW, Flores-Mir C. Long-term skeletal changes with rapid maxillary expansion: a systematic review. Angle Orthod 2005; 75: 1046-52.
16. da Silva Filho OG, Boas MC, Capelozza Filho L. Rapid maxillary expansion in the primary and mixed dentitions: a cephalometric evaluation. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1991; 100: 171-9. [CrossRef]
17. Yilmaz BS, Kucukkeles N. Skeletal, soft tissue, and airway changes following the alternate maxillary expansions and constrictions protocol. Angle Orthod 2014; 84: 868-77.
18. Melsen B. The cranial base. Acta Odontol Scand 1974; 32.
19. Huang C, Wang Y, Huang C, Liou E. Maxillary displacement after rapid maxillary expansions: an animal study. J Taiwan Assoc Orthod 2008; 20: 19-31.
20. Canturk BH, Celikoglu M. Comparison of the effects of face mask treatment started simultaneously and after the completion of the alternate rapid maxillary expansion and constriction procedure. Angle Orthod 2015; 85: 284-91. [CrossRef]
21. Maino G, Turci Y, Arreghini A, Paoletto E, Siciliani G, Lombardo L. Skeletal and dentoalveolar effects of hybrid rapid palatal expansion and facemask treatment in growing skeletal Class III patients. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2018; 153: 262-8. [CrossRef]
22. Haas AJ. Rapid expansion of the maxillary dental arch and nasal cavity by opening the mid-palate suture. Angle Orthod 1961; 31: 73-90.
23. Wertz RA. Skeletal and dental changes accompanying rapid midpalatal suture opening. Am J Orthod 1970; 58: 41-66. [CrossRef]
24. Sari Z, Uysal T, Usumez S, Basciftci FA. Rapid maxillary expansion. Is it better in the mixed or in the permanent dentition? Angle Orthod 2003; 73: 654-61.
25. Biederman W. Rapid correction of class III malocclusion by midpalatal expansion. Am J Orthod 1973; 63: 47-55. [CrossRef]
26. Davis WM, Kronman JH. Anatomical changes induced by splitting the midpalatal suture. Angle Orthod 1969; 39: 126-32.
27. Sarver DM, Johnston MW. Skeletal changes in vertical and anterior displacement of the maxilla with bonded rapid palatal expansion appliances. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1989; 95: 462-6. [CrossRef]
28. Sung SJ, Baik HS. Assessment of skeletal and dental changes by maxillary protraction. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1998; 114: 492-502. [CrossRef]
29. Cha KS. Skeletal changes of maxillary protraction in patients exhibiting skeletal Class III malocclusion: a comparison of three skeletal maturation groups. Angle Orthod 2003; 73: 26-35.
30. Kapust AJ, Sinclair PM, Turley PK. Cephalometric effects of face mask/ expansion therapy in Class III children: a comparison of three age groups. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1998; 113: 204-12. [CrossRef]

APA	celebi f, celikdelen m (2020). Comparison of the Changes Following Two Treatment Approaches: Rapid Maxillary Expansion Versus Alternate Rapid Maxillary Expansion and Constriction. , 1 - 7. 10.5152/TurkJOrthod.2020.19023
Chicago	celebi fatih,celikdelen murat Comparison of the Changes Following Two Treatment Approaches: Rapid Maxillary Expansion Versus Alternate Rapid Maxillary Expansion and Constriction. (2020): 1 - 7. 10.5152/TurkJOrthod.2020.19023
MLA	celebi fatih,celikdelen murat Comparison of the Changes Following Two Treatment Approaches: Rapid Maxillary Expansion Versus Alternate Rapid Maxillary Expansion and Constriction. , 2020, ss.1 - 7. 10.5152/TurkJOrthod.2020.19023
AMA	celebi f,celikdelen m Comparison of the Changes Following Two Treatment Approaches: Rapid Maxillary Expansion Versus Alternate Rapid Maxillary Expansion and Constriction. . 2020; 1 - 7. 10.5152/TurkJOrthod.2020.19023
Vancouver	celebi f,celikdelen m Comparison of the Changes Following Two Treatment Approaches: Rapid Maxillary Expansion Versus Alternate Rapid Maxillary Expansion and Constriction. . 2020; 1 - 7. 10.5152/TurkJOrthod.2020.19023
IEEE	celebi f,celikdelen m "Comparison of the Changes Following Two Treatment Approaches: Rapid Maxillary Expansion Versus Alternate Rapid Maxillary Expansion and Constriction." , ss.1 - 7, 2020. 10.5152/TurkJOrthod.2020.19023
ISNAD	celebi, fatih - celikdelen, murat. "Comparison of the Changes Following Two Treatment Approaches: Rapid Maxillary Expansion Versus Alternate Rapid Maxillary Expansion and Constriction". (2020), 1-7. https://doi.org/10.5152/TurkJOrthod.2020.19023

APA	celebi f, celikdelen m (2020). Comparison of the Changes Following Two Treatment Approaches: Rapid Maxillary Expansion Versus Alternate Rapid Maxillary Expansion and Constriction. Turkish Journal of Orthodontics, 33(1), 1 - 7. 10.5152/TurkJOrthod.2020.19023
Chicago	celebi fatih,celikdelen murat Comparison of the Changes Following Two Treatment Approaches: Rapid Maxillary Expansion Versus Alternate Rapid Maxillary Expansion and Constriction. Turkish Journal of Orthodontics 33, no.1 (2020): 1 - 7. 10.5152/TurkJOrthod.2020.19023
MLA	celebi fatih,celikdelen murat Comparison of the Changes Following Two Treatment Approaches: Rapid Maxillary Expansion Versus Alternate Rapid Maxillary Expansion and Constriction. Turkish Journal of Orthodontics, vol.33, no.1, 2020, ss.1 - 7. 10.5152/TurkJOrthod.2020.19023
AMA	celebi f,celikdelen m Comparison of the Changes Following Two Treatment Approaches: Rapid Maxillary Expansion Versus Alternate Rapid Maxillary Expansion and Constriction. Turkish Journal of Orthodontics. 2020; 33(1): 1 - 7. 10.5152/TurkJOrthod.2020.19023
Vancouver	celebi f,celikdelen m Comparison of the Changes Following Two Treatment Approaches: Rapid Maxillary Expansion Versus Alternate Rapid Maxillary Expansion and Constriction. Turkish Journal of Orthodontics. 2020; 33(1): 1 - 7. 10.5152/TurkJOrthod.2020.19023
IEEE	celebi f,celikdelen m "Comparison of the Changes Following Two Treatment Approaches: Rapid Maxillary Expansion Versus Alternate Rapid Maxillary Expansion and Constriction." Turkish Journal of Orthodontics, 33, ss.1 - 7, 2020. 10.5152/TurkJOrthod.2020.19023
ISNAD	celebi, fatih - celikdelen, murat. "Comparison of the Changes Following Two Treatment Approaches: Rapid Maxillary Expansion Versus Alternate Rapid Maxillary Expansion and Constriction". Turkish Journal of Orthodontics 33/1 (2020), 1-7. https://doi.org/10.5152/TurkJOrthod.2020.19023