FindTrial
Sign In

Influency of the expander type on the stability of maxillary surgical expansion

Influency of tooth-borne versus bone-borne on the stability of maxillary surgical expansion

Status
Active, not recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
REBEC
Registry ID
RBR-6b2npz
Enrollment
Unknown
Registered
2018-09-27
Start date
2014-01-10
Completion date
Unknown
Last updated
2025-10-27

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

maxillofacial abnormalities, malocclusion, stomatognathic diseases

Interventions

All patients were submited to surgically assisted rapid maxillary expasnion under general anesthesia. Were divided in two groups, the first had 15 patients with tooth borne expander type, and the ot
Procedure/surgery
E04.555.580
Q65.070

Sponsors

Instituto de Assistencia ao servidor público Estadual
Lead Sponsor
Instituto de Assistencia ao servidor público Estadual
Collaborator

Eligibility

Age
17 Years to 60 Years

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: patients between the ages of 17 and 60, healthy , both genders, with maxillary trasnversal deficiency

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: Patients with maxillofacial syndromes

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
Through digitally performed measurements in pre and pot operative models of 1 year of surgically assisted rapid maxillary expansion, we observed that greater expansion in the anterior maxillary region was obtained with the use of the bone-borne distractor device ( on averrage 8%), while the tooth-borne expander device caused a greater expansion in the maxillary posterior region( em média 9%)—

Secondary

MeasureTime frame
secondary outcomes are not expected—

Countries

Brazil

Contacts

Public ContactTatiana Barone

Instituto de Assistencia ao servidor público Estadual

tatianarbarone@uol.com.br55 11 5549-2576

Outcome results

None listed

Source: REBEC (via WHO ICTRP)