ArticleProgress in orthodontics2025
The incidence of gingival recession with non-surgical crossbite correction using completely customized lingual appliances versus surgically assisted rapid palatal expansion in adults: a cohort study.
Article in Progress in orthodontics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Apical root resorption in Class III patients following pronounced mandibular incisor retraction with lingual high precision fixed appliances: a retrospective cohort study.Head & face medicine · 2026Article
- 42° as a reference for modern orthodontic arch forms-a mathematical analysis of the Bonwill and Hawley methods.Journal of orofacial orthopedics = Fortschritte der Kieferorthopadie : Organ/official journal Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Kieferorthopadie · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe aim of this study was to investigate if there is a significant difference in the incidence of buccal gingival recession after non-surgical transversal dentoalveolar compensation with completely customized lingual appliances (DC-CCLA) versus surgically assisted rapid palatal expansion (SARPE).
methodsThis cohort study included 81 adult patients with posterior crossbite. The DC-CCLA group (n = 38; f/m 25/13; mean age 30.3 ± 13.0 years) was treated with dentoalveolar compensation using completely customized lingual appliances. The SARPE-group (n = 43; f/m 19/24; mean age 28.2 ± 9.4 years) was treated with SARPE and buccal straight wire appliances. The number of buccal gingival recessions was recorded on digital models before treatment (T0) and after removal of fixed appliances (T1). Statistical analyses included Fisher's exact tests, Chi-squared tests, Mann-Whitney U tests and mixed-effects logistic regression to evaluate the influence of various variables on the incidence of gingival recession.
resultsIn 3976 teeth evaluated, the incidence of developing gingival recessions was 8.1% with DC-CCLA (n = 77) and 5.8% with SARPE (n = 60). This difference was not statistically significant (p > 0.05). Age was a significant factor for the incidence of gingival recession and recessions were more likely to occur in males and in the maxillary posterior region.
conclusionsThere was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of gingival recessions between dentoalveolar compensation with CCLAs and SARPE after debonding, with some degree of gingival recession being inevitable with both treatment approaches.
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.