ArticleProgress in orthodontics2023
Analysis of maxillary asymmetry before and after treatment of functional posterior cross-bite: a retrospective study using 3D imaging system and deviation analysis.
Article in Progress in orthodontics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effect of occlusal interference on condylar position and trajectory of movement: a randomized crossover-controlled trial.BMC oral health · 2025Trial
- Early skeletal, nasal, and soft tissue changes after surgically assisted rapid maxillary expansion: a retrospective cephalometric study.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Transverse Maxillary Correction: Leaf Expander vs. Rapid Maxillary Expansion Appliances-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Children (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Observational
- Pediatric Treatment of Anterior-Upper-Single Dental Crossbite Using a Versatile Sagittal Screw System: A Case Series.Pediatric reports · 2025Article
- Two experimental methods to integrate intra-oral scans into 3D stereophotogrammetric facial images.Clinical oral investigations · 2025Article
- Evaluating sagittal condylar inclination: a comparative analysis of various digital workflow measures.Head & face medicine · 2024Article
- Correlation of skeletal development and midpalatal suture maturation.European journal of medical research · 2024Article
- Article
- The Implications of Artificial Intelligence in Pedodontics: A Scoping Review of Evidence-Based Literature.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPrevious evidence would suggest that subjects affected by functional posterior cross-bite (FPXB) present an asymmetric morphology of the maxilla. However, no evidence is available concerning the morphology (symmetry/asymmetry) of the maxilla after treatment of FPXB. This study aimed to investigate the volumetric and morphological changes of the palate in FPXB subjects treated with maxillary expansion and to compare these data with an untreated control group. The study sample included 20 FPXB subjects (mean age 8.1 ± 0.9 years) who underwent maxillary expansion (MEG group) and 21 FPXB subjects (mean age 7.7 ± 1.2 years) as controls (CG group). Digital models were recorded at T0 (first observation) and T1 (12-18 months after first observation) and analyzed to assess palatal volume and symmetry. Deviation analysis and percentage matching calculation were also performed between original and mirrored palatal models for each patient. All data were statistically analyzed for intra-timing, inter-timing and inter-groups assessments.
resultsAt T0, the cross-bite side (CBS) was significantly smaller than non-cross-bite side (non-CBS) in both groups (p < 0.05). At T1, the CBS/non-CBS difference reduced significantly in the MEG group (p < 0.05) while slightly worsened in the CG, however without statistical significance (p > 0.05). The matching percentage of the palatal models improved significantly at T1 in the MEG group (T0 = 74.02% ± 9.8; T1 = 89.95% ± 7.12) (p < 0.05) while no significant differences were recorded in the CG (T0 = 76.36 ± 8.64; 72.18% ± 9.65) (p > 0.05). LIMITATIONS: The small sample size and the retrospective design of the study represent two limitations that should be overcome with further clinical trials.
conclusionsSubjects with FPXB present an asymmetric development of the maxillary vault that improves after reestablishment of normal occlusion following maxillary expansion.
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.