4.5 Article

Nasal Septum Changes in Adolescents Treated with Tooth-Borne and Bone-Borne Rapid Maxillary Expansion: A CBCT Retrospective Study Using Skeletal Tortuosity Ratio and Deviation Analysis

Journal

CHILDREN-BASEL
Volume 9, Issue 12, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/children9121853

Keywords

rapid maxillary expansion; nasal septum deviation; bone-borne RME; tooth-borne RME; orthodontics; skeletal anchorage

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study used 3D images to evaluate the impact of RME on changes in NSD. The results showed that RME can reduce the degree of NSD, but there was no significant difference between RME performed with TB and BB anchorage systems.
Background: Using three-dimensional (3D) images, this study evaluated the impact of Rapid Maxillary Expansion (RME) on changes in Nasal Septal Deviation (NSD). Methods: Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) scan of 40 children with transverse maxillary deficiency, who received tooth-borne (TB) RME or bone-borne (BB) RME, were included in this investigation. Two CBCT scans were performed: one before to appliance installation (T0) and one after a 6-month retention period (T1). The analysis was performed by dividing the actual length of the septum by the desired length in the mid-sagittal plane to measure NSD based on the tortuosity ratio (TR). Results: Subjects in the TB group showed a statistically significant reduction (p < 0.05) of the TR value from T0 to T1, according to the paired Student t test. Subjects in the BB group showed similar findings, with a statistically significant reduction (p < 0.05) of the TR value from T0. No statistically significant differences were found between the mean changes of TR between TB group and BB group. Conclusions: RME may have some effects in reducing the degree of NSD; however, no differences were found between RME performed with TB and BB anchorage systems.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available