期刊
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF ORTHODONTICS
卷 36, 期 2, 页码 233-242出版社
OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/ejo/cjt044
关键词
-
资金
- National Natural Science Foundation of China [81070858, 81100778]
To evaluate and compare the effectiveness of rapid maxillary expansion (RME) and slow maxillary expansion (SME). Materials and methods: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, CENTRAL, ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, ClinicalTrial.gov, and SIGLE were searched from January 1980 to October 2012 for randomized or nonrandomized controlled trials. The processes of study search, selection, and quality assessment were conducted independently and in duplicate. Original outcome data underwent statistical pooling through Review Manager 5. Results : Fourteen eligible studies were finally included and two interventions ( RME and SME) studied. Four outcomes ( maxillary intermolar width, maxillary intercanine width, maxillary interpremolar width, and mandibular intermolar width) during three time periods ( expansion, retention, and net change) were statistically pooled. The sensitivity analysis revealed that the results from the meta-analysis were generally robust. Egger's test and Begg's test detected no publication bias except for maxillary intercanine width in expansion period for SME versus control. Conclusions: SME is effective in expanding maxillary arch, while we cannot determine its effectiveness in mandibular arch expansion. RME is effective in expanding both maxillary and mandibular arches. Furthermore, SME is superior to RME in expanding molar region of maxillary arch, while similar with RME in mandibular arch expansion. However, we cannot compare their effectiveness in maxillary anterior region.
作者
我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。
推荐
暂无数据