This study evaluated cephalometric changes in Class II malocclusion patients treated with expansion versus extraction in a Saudi Arabian sample. Data from 90 orthodontic patients meeting strict eligibility criteria were collected from multiple private practices in Saudi Arabia. The sample was divided according to treatment modality: Group 1 consisted of patients treated with four premolar extractions (n = 45), and Group 2 included patients treated with maxillary expansion using a banded rapid palatal expander (RPE) supported by mini-screws (n = 45). Nasolabial angle (NLA) for extraction cases presented a statistically significant difference in post-treatment radiographs (mean difference: -3.07 ± 8.92, P = 0.030) and significant changes in all dental variables (e.g., upper incisor position to A-Pog UI-APog pre-treatment mean difference: 4.49 ± 3.89; P P = 0.017). Cases treated with RPE reported significant changes in the lower lip thickness (mean difference: -1.02 ± 2.20, P = 0.028). Cases treated with extraction had a greater influence on the dental component than on the soft tissue. In contrast, expansion cases showed a slight impact dentally but a greater effect on soft tissue parameters. However, neither treatment modality resulted in significant skeletal changes.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Nancy Ajwa
Othman AlOthman
Anas Mohamed Baghareeb
University of Pennsylvania
King Khalid University
Majmaah University
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
Ajwa et al. (Mon,) studied this question.
synapsesocial.com/papers/698585438f7c464f23008898 — DOI: https://doi.org/10.25122/jml-2025-0157