Trial reportJournal of orofacial orthopedics = Fortschritte der Kieferorthopadie : Organ/official journal Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Kieferorthopadie2017
Cephalometric and dental arch changes to Haas-type rapid maxillary expander anchored to deciduous vs permanent molars: a multicenter, randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Journal of orofacial orthopedics = Fortschritte der Kieferorthopadie : Organ/official journal Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Kieferorthopadie, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02798822 (Dental Arches Response to Haas-type RME Anchored to Deciduous vs Permanent Molars in Children With Unilateral Posterior Crossbite), which is not on this map. Cited by 16 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Dental Arches Response to Haas-type RME Anchored to Deciduous vs Permanent Molars in Children With Unilateral Posterior Crossbite
Who cites it
16 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 38 citations in OpenAlex.
- Orthodontic treatment for crowded teeth in children.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Orthodontic treatment for posterior crossbites.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Three-dimensional assessment on digital cast of spontaneous upper first molar distorotation after Ni-ti leaf springs expander and rapid maxillary expander: A two-centre randomized controlled trial.Orthodontics & craniofacial research · 2025Trial
- Pain and discomfort during the first week of maxillary expansion using two different expanders: patient-reported outcomes in a randomized controlled trial.European journal of orthodontics · 2023Trial
- Cephalometric evaluation of rapid and slow maxillary expansion in patients with BCLP:The Angle orthodontist · 2019Trial
- Transverse Maxillary Correction: Leaf Expander vs. Rapid Maxillary Expansion Appliances-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Comparison of Enamel Roughness and Calcium Release between Manual and Mechanical Stripping with and without Polishing after Demineralization.Frontiers in dentistry · 2026Article
- Comparison of the Haas Expander and the Elastodontic Device for the Resolution of Transverse Discrepancies in Growing Patients: A Single-Centre Observational Study.Reports (MDPI) · 2024Article
- 3D occlusal changes of upper first molars after rapid maxillary expansion on permanent versus deciduous teeth: a retrospective multicenter CBCT study.Progress in orthodontics · 2023Article
- Evaluation of Enamel Surfaces after Different Techniques of Interproximal Enamel Reduction.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2023Article
- Condylar Changes in Children with Posterior Crossbite after Maxillary Expansion: Tridimensional Evaluation.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Early Orthodontic Treatments of Unilateral Posterior Crossbite: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Review
- Buccal Bone Changes Around First Permanent Molars and Second Primary Molars after Maxillary Expansion with a Low Compliance Ni-Ti Leaf Spring Expander.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
- Volumetric Changes in the Upper Airways after Rapid and Slow Maxillary Expansion in Growing Patients: A Case-Control Study.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- Upper canine response to rapid maxillary expander anchored to deciduous vs. permanent molars.Journal of orofacial orthopedics = Fortschritte der Kieferorthopadie : Organ/official journal Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Kieferorthopadie · 2020Article
- Expansion of permanent first molars with rapid maxillary expansion appliance anchored on primary second molars.Journal of clinical and experimental dentistry · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo assess radiographic changes and dental arch changes with Haas-type rapid maxillary expansion (H-RME) anchored to deciduous versus permanent molars in children with unilateral posterior crossbite.
methodsIn all, 70 patients with unilateral posterior crossbite were randomly allocated to group GrE (H-RME on second deciduous molars) or Gr6 (H-RME on first permanent molars) and compared between T0 (before treatment) and T1 (at the RME removal; i.e., 10 months after the end of the activation of the screw). At T0 and T1, cephalometric head films were digitally traced, dental casts were scanned, and rotations of the upper first molars, of the upper central, and of the upper lateral incisors on the models were measured.
resultsBetween T0 and T1, the cephalometric analysis showed a significant decrease of the angulation of the upper central incisors to the SN line and to the palatal plane in GrE together with a significant increase of the lower incisors to the mandibular plane (IMPA). The digital dental cast analysis showed that the central and lateral incisors mesiorotated significantly more in GrE than in Gr6. Patients in GrE also showed a statistically significant distorotation of the upper first permanent molars after RME.
conclusionsGrE showed a significant and spontaneous retraction and alignment of the upper central and lateral incisors compared to Gr6. This is probably due to a more pronounced expansion in the anterior area and more accentuated pressure of the upper lip in GrE. IMPA increased significantly in GrE vs Gr6. GrE also showed a more significant distorotation of the upper first permanent molars compared to Gr6. This is probably due to the design of the H-RME in GrE, where the screw is more anteriorly positioned and the bands are absent on the upper first permanent molars which are, therefore, free to adapt to the best occlusal situation.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT02798822.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.