Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 8, 2025
Author Spotlight: 3D Movement Assessment of Maxillary Posterior Teeth in Clear Aligner Treatment
Published on: February 23, 2024
Analysis of maxillary asymmetry before and after treatment of functional posterior cross-bite: a retrospective study
Vincenzo Ronsivalle1, Gaetano Isola1, Gianmarco Lo Re1
1Department of General Surgery and Medical-Surgical Specialties, Section of Orthodontics, University of Catania, Policlinico Universitario "Gaspare Rodolico - San Marco", Via Santa Sofia 78, 95123, Catania, Italy.
Background:
Previous 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.
Results:
At 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.
Conclusions:
Subjects with FPXB present an asymmetric development of the maxillary vault that improves after reestablishment of normal occlusion following maxillary expansion.
