Trial reportClinical oral investigations2025
Evaluating the impact of various predictors on rapid maxillary expansion (RME) success.
Trial report in Clinical oral investigations, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo evaluate indicators that predict the success of rapid maxillary expansion (RME) in late adolescents using pretreatment cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). MATERIALS AND
methodsA prospective clinical trial was conducted to integrate radiological and clinical evaluations with blinded outcome assessment. A total of 46 patients (18 males and 28 females) with a mean age of 15.7 ± 1.4 years were enrolled. All patients were diagnosed with posterior skeletal crossbite and underwent CBCT scans prior to rapid maxillary expansion (RME) using a bonded hyrax expander. Patients were divided into Successful (S-RME) or Failed (F-RME) groups based on midpalatal suture response four days after expansion initiation. Expansion was performed twice daily and continued until molar overcorrection, followed by a four-month fixation. Four CBCT variables (midpalatal suture maturation [MSM], Cervical vertebral maturation [CVM], midpalatal suture density [MSD], and the length and thickness of the palate), age, and sex were analyzed using t-tests, Mann-Whitney U, and chi-square. ICC evaluated random errors.
resultsAge, maturation stage (MSM), CVM stage, MSD, and the length of the palate were all variables with a statistically significant correlation (P <.05). Sex, as well as the thickness and area of the palate, did not show significant differences between the groups (P >. 05).
conclusionsPatients with a higher stage of MSM and CVM had a greater risk of RME failure. Additionally, patients with a lower density ratio and shorter palate length had a better prognosis for conventional RME. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Choosing between traditional and surgically assisted rapid maxillary expansion (RME) is challenging, especially in late adolescents. Orthodontists should consider additional indicators to guide clinical decisions. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN31077190.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40451936What 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.