Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Maxillary dentoskeletal outcomes of the expander with differential opening and the fan-type expander: a randomized controlled trial

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Clinical Oral Investigations Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

The aim of this study was to compare the maxillary dentoskeletal outcomes of the expander with differential opening (EDO) and the fan-type expander (FE).

Material and methods

Forty-eight patients with maxillary arch constriction in the mixed dentition were randomly allocated into EDO and FE groups. Cone-beam computed tomography scans were acquired before and after expansion. Linear and angular three-dimensional changes were assessed after cranial base superimposition using the ITK-SNAP and the 3D Slicer software. T or Mann-Whitney U tests were used for intergroup comparisons (P<0.05).

Results

The EDO group comprised 24 patients treated with the EDO (13 female, 11 male; 7.6 years). The FE group comprised 24 patients treated with the FE (14 female, 10 male; 7.8 years). Skeletal lateral displacements were greater in the EDO group with greater expansion in the orbital, nasal cavity, zygomatic bone, and palate regions (mean intergroup differences of 0.4, 0.8, 0.9, and 1.1 mm, respectively). Intercanine expansion and canine buccal inclination were greater in the FE group, while intermolar distance changes and molar buccal inclination were greater in the EDO group. Similar changes were observed for vertical and anteroposterior displacements and palatal plane rotation.

Conclusions

The EDO produced greater transverse skeletal expansion compared to the FE, with similar vertical and anteroposterior effects. Dental changes were greater in the molar region for patients treated with the EDO and in the canine region for patients treated with the FE.

Clinical relevance

The EDO and the FE are capable of producing skeletal changes in the mixed dentition. The decision between both expanders will depend on the amount of expansion required in the molar region and in the nasomaxillary complex.

Trial registration

The trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, under the identifier NCT03705871.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Haas AJ (1961) Rapid expansion of the maxillary dental arch and nasal cavity by opening the midpalatal suture. Angle Orthod 31(2):73–90. https://doi.org/10.1043/0003-3219(1961)031<0073:REOTMD>2.0.CO;2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Haas AJ (1965) The treatment of maxillary deficiency by opening the midpalatal suture. Angle Orthod 35:200–217. https://doi.org/10.1043/00033219(1965)035<0200:TTOMDB>2.0.CO;2

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Haas AJ (1970) Palatal expansion: just the beginning of dentofacial orthopedics. Am J Orthod 57(3):219–255. https://doi.org/10.1016/0002-9416(70)90241-1

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. da Silva Filho OG, Boas MC, Capelozza Filho L (1991) Rapid maxillary expansion in the primary and mixed dentitions: a cephalometric evaluation. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 100(2):171–179. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0889-5406(05)81524-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Akkaya S, Lorenzon S, Ucem TT (1999) A comparison of sagittal and vertical effects between bonded rapid and slow maxillary expansion procedures. Eur J Orthod 21(2):175–180. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/21.2.175

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Chung CH, Font B (2004) Skeletal and dental changes in the sagittal, vertical, and transverse dimensions after rapid palatal expansion. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 126(5):569–575. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2003.10.035

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Lagravere MO, Major PW, Flores-Mir C (2005) Long-term skeletal changes with rapid maxillary expansion: a systematic review. Angle Orthod 75(6):1046–1052. https://doi.org/10.1043/0003-3219(2005)75[1046:LSCWRM]2.0.CO;2

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Doruk C, Bicakci AA, Basciftci FA, Agar U, Babacan H (2004) A comparison of the effects of rapid maxillary expansion and fan-type rapid maxillary expansion on dentofacial structures. Angle Orthod 74(2):184–194. https://doi.org/10.1043/0003-3219(2004)074<0184:ACOTEO>2.0.CO;2

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Weissheimer A, de Menezes LM, Mezomo M, Dias DM, de Lima EMS, Rizzatto SMD (2011) Immediate effects of rapid maxillary expansion with Haas-type and hyrax-type expanders: a randomized clinical trial. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 140(3):366–376. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2010.07.025

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Corekci B, Goyenc YB (2013) Dentofacial changes from fan-type rapid maxillary expansion vs traditional rapid maxillary expansion in early mixed dentition. Angle Orthod 83(5):842–850. https://doi.org/10.2319/103112-837.1

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Figueiredo DS, Bartolomeo FU, Romualdo CR, Palomo JM, Horta MC, Andrade I Jr, Oliveira DD (2014) Dentoskeletal effects of 3 maxillary expanders in patients with clefts: a cone-beam computed tomography study. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 146(1):73–81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2014.04.013

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. de Medeiros Alves AC, Janson G, Mcnamara JA Jr, Lauris JRP, Garib DG (2020) Maxillary expander with differential opening vs Hyrax expander: a randomized clinical trial. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 157(1):7–18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2019.07.010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Massaro C, Janson G, Miranda F, Aliaga-Del Castillo A, Pugliese F, Lauris JRP, Garib D (2020) Dental arch changes comparison between expander with differential opening and fan-type expander: a randomized controlled trial. Eur J Orthod (In press). https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjaa050

  14. Cozza P, De Toffol L, Mucedero M, Ballanti F (2003) Use of a modified butterfly expander to increase anterior arch length. J Clin Orthod 37(9):490–495

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Garib D, Garcia L, Pereira V, Lauris R, Yen S (2014) A rapid maxillary expander with differential opening. J Clin Orthod 48(7):430–435

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Camporesi M, Franchi L, Doldo T, Defraia E (2013) Evaluation of mechanical properties of three different screws for rapid maxillary expansion. Biomed Eng Online 12:128. https://doi.org/10.1186/1475-925X-12-128

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Garib DG, Henriques JFC, Janson G, Freitas MR, Coelho RA (2005) Rapid maxillary expansion: tooth tissue-borne versus tooth-borne expanders: a computed tomography evaluation of dentoskeletal effects. Angle Orthod 75(4):548–557. https://doi.org/10.1043/0003-3219(2005)75[548:RMETVT]2.0.CO;2

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Pangrazio-Kulbersh V, Wine P, Haughey M, Pajtas B, Kaczynski R (2012) Cone beam computed tomography evaluation of changes in the naso-maxillary complex associated with two types of maxillary expanders. Angle Orthod 82(3):448–457. https://doi.org/10.2319/072211-464.1

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Habeeb M, Boucher N, Chung CH (2013) Effects of rapid palatal expansion on the sagittal and vertical dimensions of the maxilla: a study on cephalograms derived from cone-beam computed tomography. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 144(3):398–403. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2013.04.012

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Bazargani F, Feldmann I, Bondemark L (2013) Three-dimensional analysis of effects of rapid maxillary expansion on facial sutures and bones. Angle Orthod 83(6):1074–1082. https://doi.org/10.2319/020413-103.1

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D, Group C (2010) CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMC Med 8:18. https://doi.org/10.1186/1741-7015-8-18

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Oenning AC, Jacobs R, Pauwels R, Stratis A, Hedesiu M, Salmon B, Dimitra Research Group hwdb (2018) Cone-beam CT in paediatric dentistry: DIMITRA project position statement. Pediatr Radiol 48(3):308–316. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00247-017-4012-9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Yushkevich PA, Gerig G (2017) ITK-SNAP: an intractive medical image segmentation tool to meet the need for expert-guided segmentation of complex medical images. IEEE Pulse 8(4):54–57. https://doi.org/10.1109/MPUL.2017.2701493

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Slicer 3D. Available at: https://download.slicer.org. Last accessed on June 3rd, 2019

  25. Ruellas AC, Tonello C, Gomes LR, Yatabe MS, Macron L, Lopinto J, Goncalves JR, Garib Carreira DG, Alonso N, Souki BQ, Coqueiro Rda S, Cevidanes LH (2016) Common 3-dimensional coordinate system for assessment of directional changes. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 149(5):645–656. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2015.10.021

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Cevidanes LH, Styner MA, Proffit WR (2006) Image analysis and superimposition of 3-dimensional cone-beam computed tomography models. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 129(5):611–618. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2005.12.008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Ruellas AC, Huanca Ghislanzoni LT, Gomes MR, Danesi C, Lione R, Nguyen T, McNamara JA Jr, Cozza P, Franchi L, Cevidanes LH (2016) Comparison and reproducibility of 2 regions of reference for maxillary regional registration with cone-beam computed tomography. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 149(4):533–542. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2015.09.026

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Pandis N (2011) Randomization. Part 1: sequence generation. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 140(5):747–748. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2011.06.020

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Koo TK, Li MY (2016) A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. J Chiropr Med 15(2):155–163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcm.2016.02.012

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Ludlow JB, Laster WS, See M, Bailey LJ, Hershey HG (2007) Accuracy of measurements of mandibular anatomy in cone beam computed tomography images. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 103(4):534–542. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tripleo.2006.04.008

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Misch KA, Yi ES, Sarment DP (2006) Accuracy of cone beam computed tomography for periodontal defect measurements. J Periodontol 77(7):1261–1266. https://doi.org/10.1902/jop.2006.050367

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Loubele M, Van Assche N, Carpentier K, Maes F, Jacobs R, van Steenberghe D, Suetens P (2008) Comparative localized linear accuracy of small-field cone-beam CT and multislice CT for alveolar bone measurements. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 105(4):512–518. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tripleo.2007.05.004

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Scarfe WC, Farman AG, Sukovic P (2006) Clinical applications of cone-beam computed tomography in dental practice. J Can Dent Assoc 72(1):75–80

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Berger VW, Exner DV (1999) Detecting selection bias in randomized clinical trials. Control Clin Trials 20(4):319–327. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0197-2456(99)00014-8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Garib D, Lauris RDCMC, Calil LR, Alves ACDM, Janson G, De Almeida AM, Cevidanes LHS, Lauris JRP (2016) Dentoskeletal outcomes of a rapid maxillary expander with differential opening in patients with bilateral cleft lip and palate: a prospective clinical trial. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 150(4):564–574. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2016.05.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Belluzzo RHL, Faltin Junior K, Lascala CE, Vianna LBR (2012) Maxillary constriction: are there differences between anterior and posterior regions? Dental Press J Orthod 7(4):1–6

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This study was financed in part by the Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior - Brasil (CAPES) - Finance Code 001, São Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP) - Grant numbers 2017/12911-9, 2017/24115-2 and 2018/16154-3, and NIDCR R01 DE024450.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthodontics, Bauru Dental School, University of São Paulo, Alameda Octávio Pinheiro Brisolla 9-75, Bauru, SP, 17012-901, Brazil

    Camila Massaro & Guilherme Janson

  2. Department of Orthodontics, Bauru Dental School and Hospital for Rehabilitation of Craniofacial Anomalies, University of São Paulo, Alameda Octávio Pinheiro Brisolla 9-75, Bauru, SP, 17012-901, Brazil

    Daniela Garib

  3. Department of Orthodontics and Pediatric Dentistry, School of Dentistry, University of Michigan, 1011 N University Avenue, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, USA

    Lucia Cevidanes, Marilia Yatabe & Antonio Carlos Ruellas

  4. Department of Community Health, Bauru Dental School, University of São Paulo, Alameda Octávio Pinheiro Brisolla 9-75, Bauru, SP, 17012-901, Brazil

    José Roberto Pereira Lauris

  5. School of Dentistry, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil

    Antonio Carlos Ruellas

Authors
  1. Camila Massaro
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Daniela Garib
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Lucia Cevidanes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Guilherme Janson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Marilia Yatabe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. José Roberto Pereira Lauris
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Antonio Carlos Ruellas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Camila Massaro.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval

In this article, all procedures involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the Research Ethics Committee of Bauru Dental School, University of São Paulo, Brazil (protocol number: 71648917.6.0000.5417).

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Conflict of interest

Licensed patent of the expander with differential opening (PI 1101050-9) was registered by the second author (DG), São Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP) and University of São Paulo at the National Institute of Industrial Property (INPIBrazil).

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This article is based on research submitted by Dr. Camila Massaro in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Ph.D. in Orthodontics at Bauru Dental School, University of São Paulo.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Massaro, C., Garib, D., Cevidanes, L. et al. Maxillary dentoskeletal outcomes of the expander with differential opening and the fan-type expander: a randomized controlled trial. Clin Oral Invest 25, 5247–5256 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-021-03832-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-021-03832-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation