Changes in occlusal relationships in mixed dentition patients treated with rapid maxillary expansion. A prospective clinical study

Abstract

Objective: To prospectively measure occlusal changes in mixed dentition patients who underwent a standardized early expansion protocol.

Materials and methods: The treatment sample consisted of 500 patients who were assigned to three groups according to molar relationship: Class I (n = 204), end-to-end (n = 166), and Class II (n = 130). All patients were treated with a bonded rapid maxillary expander (RME) followed by a removable maintenance plate and a transpalatal arch. Mean age at the start of treatment was 8.8 years (T(1)), with a pre-phase 2 treatment cephalogram (T(2)) taken 3.7 years later. The control sample consisted of the cephalometric records of 188 untreated subjects (Class 1, n = 79; end-to-end, n = 51; Class II, n = 58).

Results: The largest change in molar relationship was noted when the Class II treatment group (1.8 mm) was compared with the matched control group (0.3 mm). A positive change was seen in 81% of the Class II treatment group, with almost half of the group improving by > or = 2.0 mm. The end-to-end treatment group had a positive change of 1.4 mm, compared with a control value of 0.6 mm, and the Class I group of about 1 mm compared with controls, who remained unchanged (0.1 mm). Skeletal changes were not significant when any of the groups were compared with controls.

Conclusion: The expansion protocol had a significantly favorable effect on the sagittal occlusal relationships of Class II, end-to-end, and Class I patients treated in the early mixed dentition.

Figures

Figure 1

Classification of sagittal molar relationships on cephalometric tracings. Vertical lines are perpendicular to the occlusal plane.

Figure 2

Change in molar relationship: Class II groups.

Figure 3

Change in molar relationship: end-to-end groups.

Figure 4

Change in molar relationship: Class I groups.

Figure 5

Prevalence rates for positive change in molar relationships in TG vs CG subgroups within each malocclusion group.