Trial reportProgress in orthodontics2017
Mandibular response after rapid maxillary expansion in class II growing patients: a pilot randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Progress in orthodontics, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. It is linked to trial NCT03159962 (Mandibular Response After Rapid Maxillary Expansion in Class II Growing Patients), which is not on this map. Cited by 11 papers.
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.
Mandibular Response After Rapid Maxillary Expansion in Class II Growing Patients: a Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 34 citations in OpenAlex.
- Skeletal displacements and upper airway changes following tooth-borne and tooth-bone-borne rapid palatal expansion in adolescents: secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial.BMC oral health · 2026Trial
- Mandibular Response in Class II Division 1 Growing Subjects: Clear Aligners vs. Rapid Maxillary Expansion Therapy. A Controlled Pilot Study.Orthodontics & craniofacial research · 2026Article
- Skeletal and Dental-Alveolar Changes With Invisalign First Expansion System in the Mixed Dentition: A Retrospective Study.Orthodontics & craniofacial research · 2026Article
- Soft tissue evaluation of functional therapy in growing patients with class II malocclusion: mandibular advancement vs. twin block-a retrospective study.Frontiers in dental medicine · 2025Article
- Dentoskeletal effects of clear aligner vs twin block-a short-term study of functional appliances.Journal of orofacial orthopedics = Fortschritte der Kieferorthopadie : Organ/official journal Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Kieferorthopadie · 2024Article
- Palatal asymmetry assessed by intraoral scans: effects of sex, orthodontic treatment, and twinning. A retrospective cohort study.BMC oral health · 2023Article
- Effects of Rapid Maxillary Expander and Delaire Mask Treatment on Airway Sagittal Dimensions in Pediatric Patients Affected by Class III Malocclusion and Obstructive Sleep Apnea Syndrome.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Evaluation of the Upper Arch Morphological Changes after Two Different Protocols of Expansion in Early Mixed Dentition: Rapid Maxillary Expansion and InvisalignLife (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Changes in the Mandible Following Rapid Maxillary Expansion in Children with Class II Malocclusion: A Systematic Review.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Correction to: Mandibular response after rapid maxillary expansion in class II growing patients: a pilot randomized controlled trial.Progress in orthodontics · 2018Article
- [Early orthodontic/orthopedic treatment in patients with class II sagittal anomalies. A review].Revista cientifica odontologica (Universidad Cientifica del Sur)Review
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of this pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT) was to evaluate the sagittal mandibular response induced by rapid maxillary expansion (RME) therapy in mixed dentition patients with class II malocclusion, comparing the effects of bonded RME and banded RME with a matched untreated class II control group.
methodsThis RCT was designed in parallel with an allocation ratio of 1:1:1. The sample consisted of 30 children with a mean age of 8.1 ± 0.6 years who were randomly assigned to three groups: group 1 treated with bonded RME, group 2 treated with banded RME, and group 3 the untreated control group. All patients met the following inclusion criteria: early mixed dentition, class II molar relationship, transverse discrepancy ≥ 4 mm, overjet ≥ 5 mm, and prepubertal skeletal maturity stage (CS1-CS2). The expansion screw was activated one quarter of a turn per day (0.25 mm) until overcorrection was reached. For each subject, lateral cephalograms and plaster casts were obtained before treatment (T1) and after 1 year (T2). A randomization list was created for the group assignment, with an allocation ratio of 1:1:1. The observer who performed all the measurements was blinded to group assignment. The study was single-blinded in regard to statistical analysis.
resultsRME was effective in the correction of maxillary deficiency. Class II patients treated with both types of RME showed no significant improvement of the anteroposterior relationship of the maxilla and the mandible at both skeletal and occlusal levels. The acrylic splint RME had significant effects on reducing the skeletal vertical dimension and the gonial angle.
conclusionsThe orthopedic expansion did not affect the sagittal relationship of class II patients treated in the early mixed dentition when compared with the untreated control group. Additional studies with a larger sample are warranted to elucidate individual variations in dento-skeletal mandibular response to the maxillary expansion protocol in class-II-growing patients.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT03159962 .
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.