The effectiveness of the early orthodontic correction of functional unilateral posterior crossbite in the mixed dentition period: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Alsawaf, Danya Hassan; Almaasarani, Salam Ghazwan; Hajeer, Mohammad Y.; Rajeh, Nada

doi:10.1186/s40510-022-00398-4

Progress in Orthodontics

Table 3 The quad-helix versus the expansion plates (pre and post-expansion differences in the evaluated outcomes) and the RME versus an untreated CG (pre and post-treatment measurements of the evaluated outcomes)

From: The effectiveness of the early orthodontic correction of functional unilateral posterior crossbite in the mixed dentition period: a systematic review and meta-analysis

References	Comparison between QH and EP Outcomes changes (T2-T1)
References	Maxillary intermolar width [mm]	Maxillary intercanine width [mm]	Mandibular intermolar width [mm]	Mandibular intercanine width [mm]	Success rate [ratio]	Relapse rate at different time points [ratio]	Treatment duration [months]	Correction of the mandible midline [ratio]
Boysen et al. [39]	QH: 5.61 ± 1.78 EP: 4.65 ± 1.52	QH: 5.17 ± 1.86 EP: 3.50 ± 1.25	QH: − 0.20 ± 2.32 EP: 0.02 ± 0.36	QH: 0.01 ± 0.74 EP: − 0.16 ± 0.64	Not-studied	Not-studied	Not-studied	Not-studied
Bjerklin et al. [41]	QH: 1.2 ± 0.67 EP: 1.5 ± 1.04	QH: 1.6 ± 1.04 EP: 2.3 ± 1.22	QH: 0.0 ± 0.21 EP: 0.0 ± 0.57	QH: 0.1 ± 0.23 EP: − 0.1 ± 0.91	QH: 19/19 EP: 19/19	Not-studied	QH: 7.7 ± 2.79 EP: 12.5 ± 4.22	Not-studied
Petren et al. [42]	QH: 4.4 ± 1.19 EP: 3 ± 1.57	QH: 2 ± 1.18 EP: 2.7 ± 1.2	QH: − 0.1 ± 0.62 EP: 0.5 ± 0.67	QH: 0.1 ± 0.26 EP: 0.2 ± 0.28	QH: 15/15 EP: 10/15	Not-studied	QH: 4.8 ± 3.52 EP: 9.6 ± 3.04	QH: 14/15 EP: 12/15
Petren et al. [43]	QH: 3.7 ± 1.58 EP: 3.2 ± 1.24	QH: 2.7 ± 1.57 EP: 2.6 ± 1.58	QH: − 0.4 ± 0.82 EP: 0.4 ± 0.67	QH: − 0.5 ± 1.21 EP: 0.5 ± 1.42	Not-studied	Relapse after 3 Y QH: ½0 EP: 0/15	Not-studied	Not-studied
Godoy et al. [6]	QH: 5.7 ± 2.31 EP: 4.46 ± 2.22	QH: 3.48 ± 2.24 EP: 1.8 ± 2.96	QH: 0.46 ± 1.20 EP: − 0.12 ± 1.36	QH: − 0.21 ± 0.92 EP: 0.28 ± 1.51	QH: 33/33 EP: 30/33	Relapse after 1 Y QH: 3/33 EP: 3/33	QH: 4.24 ± 2.05 EP: 6.12 ± 3.25	Not-studied
Sollenius et al. [45]	QH: 4.11 ± 1.86 ^A EP: 2.49 ± 1.67 ^A	QH: 3.36 ± 1.87 ^A EP: 2.53 ± 2.81 ^A	Not-studied	Not-studied	QH: 51/55 ^A EP: 36/55 ^A	Not-studied	QH: 4.84 ± 1.88 ^A EP: 8.7 ± 3.49 ^A	Not-studied
Sollenius et al. [46]	Not-studied	Not-studied	Not-studied	Not-studied	Not-studied	Not-studied	Not-studied	QH:34/48 ^A EP: 26/44 ^A

References	Comparison between RME and untreated CG
References	Measurement time	Maxillary intermolar width [mm]	Maxillary intercanine width [mm]	Mandibular intermolar width [mm]	Mandibular intercanine width [mm]	Correction of the mandible midline [mm]
Lippold et al. [44]	T1	RME (n = 31): 42.2 ± 2.6 CG (–35): 42.6 ± 3.1	RME (n = 31): 29 ± 2.6 CG (–35): 27.9 ± 2.2	RME (n = 31): 48.1 ± 2 CG (n = 35): 47.2 ± 02.5	RME (n = 31): 25.8 ± 1.9 CG (n = 35): 25.2 ± 1.7	RME (n = 31): 2.1 ± 1.3 CG (n = 35): 1.9 ± 1.2
	T2	RME (n = 31): 47.3 ± 2.5 CG (–35): 43.4 ± 2.3	RME (n = 31): 32.6 ± 2.7 ^A CG (–35): 28.9 ± 2.2	RME (n = 31): 48.6 ± 1.7 CG (n = 35): 47.7 ± 2.6	RME (n = 31): 25.9 ± 1.7 CG (n = 35): 25.4 ± 1.6	RME (n = 31): 0.5 ± 0.5 CG (n = 35): 2.1 ± 1.3

QH: quad-helix, EP: expansion plate, T1: before expansion, T2: after expansion, A: the mean and SD for the combined subgroups were calculated mathematically depending on certain formulas. CO: centric occlusion, MO: maximum occlusion, XB: crossbite, N-XB: non-crossbite, RME: rapid maxillary expansion, CG: control group

Back to article page