Dental arch size and shape after maxillary expansion in bilateral complete cleft lip and palate (BCLP): comparison between Hyrax, Quaid-helix and expander with differential opening
The objective of this study was to compare the effects in upper dental arch size and shape after maxillary expansion with Hyrax, Quad-helix and a differential opening expander in bilateral cleft lip and palate (BCLP) patients. Seventy-five patients were divided into three groups: Hyrax (H), Quad-hel...
| Autor: | |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | tesis de maestría |
| Estado: | Versión publicada |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2018 |
| País: | Brasil |
| Institución: | Universidade de São Paulo (USP) |
| Repositorio: | Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da USP |
| Idioma: | inglés |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:teses.usp.br:tde-06102020-145941 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://www.teses.usp.br/teses/disponiveis/61/61132/tde-06102020-145941/ |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | Cleft lip Cleft palate Fenda labial Fissura palatina Orthodontics Ortodontia Palatal expansion technique Técnica de expansão palatina |
| Sumario: | The objective of this study was to compare the effects in upper dental arch size and shape after maxillary expansion with Hyrax, Quad-helix and a differential opening expander in bilateral cleft lip and palate (BCLP) patients. Seventy-five patients were divided into three groups: Hyrax (H), Quad-helix (QH) and Expander with differential opening (EDO). Digital models were obtained from BCLP patients before (T1) and after 6 months (T2) of the maxillary expansion. Twelve landmarks were placed, by one investigator, on T1 and T2 dental models of each group and x,y coordinates for each landmark were collected. For dental arch size analysis, centroid size of each dental arch at T1 and T2 was calculated from the raw coordinates and was used as the measure of size. Procrustes Analysis was performed for dental arch shape analysis. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to compare the groups for size and shape differences (p<0,05). There were no significant dental arch size differences among expanders, either at T1 or T2. Differences in arch shape were found between all groups at T2. Intragroup arch shape showed a significant variation for QH and EDO groups while remained stable in H group. When dental arch shape changes are desired, with greater intercanine than intermolar increase, either the Quad-helix or the Expander with differential opening should be used, while the Hyrax expander should be used when no arch shape changes are desired |
|---|