Tooth-borne versus bone-borne rapid maxillary expansion for transverse maxillary deficiency: A systematic review
| Autor: | Mahdieh Khosravi, Manoochehr Karami, Alessandro Ugolini, Sepideh Soheilifar, Hamed Mirzaei, Amirfarhang Miresmaeili, Vahid Shahidi-Zandi, Majid Mahmoudzadeh |
|---|---|
| Jazyk: | angličtina |
| Rok vydání: | 2019 |
| Předmět: |
Molar
Adult Palatal Expansion Technique Adolescent Databases Factual Orthodontics Bone-borne Maxillary expansion Systematic review Tooth-borne Mandibular first molar Perceived pain law.invention 03 medical and health sciences 0302 clinical medicine Dental Arch stomatognathic system Randomized controlled trial Orthodontic Appliances law Premolar Maxilla Orthodontic Anchorage Procedures Medicine Humans Orthodontic Appliance Design Rapid maxillary expansion 030212 general & internal medicine Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic business.industry Significant difference Transverse maxillary deficiency 030206 dentistry medicine.anatomical_structure business Malocclusion |
| Popis: | Summary Purpose The aim of this study was to compare dentoskeletal effects of bone-borne expanders with those of conventional expanders in adolescent and adults having transverse maxillary deficiency. Methods All randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing the effects of bone-borne with those of tooth-borne expansion for treatment of maxillary transverse deficiency in adults and adolescents with maxillary transverse deficiency or posterior crossbite were included. The systematic search was irrespective of language and publication type. The electronic search was conducted from 1980 to January 2018. Results The electronic searches retrieved 713 references after screening for eligibility criteria. Eight studies met the inclusion criteria for this systematic review involving 289 participants. Four studies compared rapid maxillary expansion (RME) between bone-borne and tooth-borne devices and indicated effectiveness of both devices on maxillary expansion. In the first molar region, there was no significant difference between two devices in either skeletal or dental expansion. Two studies compared the effects of bone-borne and tooth-borne device following SARME and suggested no significant difference regarding amount and pattern of expansion at various levels and in molar and premolar region between two groups. Two studies compared bone-borne and tooth-bone-borne devices. Conclusion Within the limit of the present evidence regarding maxillary expansion, it seems that both tooth-borne and bone-borne devices result in the same outcome in terms of the amount of maxillary expansion, dental tipping, stability and perceived pain both in RME and SARME procedure. PROSPERO registration: CRD42017061078. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|