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
Abstract Background The 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 e...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
SpringerOpen
2025-07-01
|
| Series: | Progress in Orthodontics |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1186/s40510-025-00568-0 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1849238361601998848 |
|---|---|
| author | Jonas Q. Schmid Lara Bettenhäuser-Hartung Moritz Kanemeier Ariane Hohoff Johannes Kleinheinz Thomas Stamm Claudius Middelberg Yann Janssens |
| author_facet | Jonas Q. Schmid Lara Bettenhäuser-Hartung Moritz Kanemeier Ariane Hohoff Johannes Kleinheinz Thomas Stamm Claudius Middelberg Yann Janssens |
| author_sort | Jonas Q. Schmid |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract Background The 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). Methods This 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. Results In 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. Conclusions There 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. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-684ec4e87bad41b2b93af37af0734c2b |
| institution | Kabale University |
| issn | 2196-1042 |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2025-07-01 |
| publisher | SpringerOpen |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Progress in Orthodontics |
| spelling | doaj-art-684ec4e87bad41b2b93af37af0734c2b2025-08-20T04:01:40ZengSpringerOpenProgress in Orthodontics2196-10422025-07-0126111410.1186/s40510-025-00568-0The incidence of gingival recession with non-surgical crossbite correction using completely customized lingual appliances versus surgically assisted rapid palatal expansion in adults: a cohort studyJonas Q. Schmid0Lara Bettenhäuser-Hartung1Moritz Kanemeier2Ariane Hohoff3Johannes Kleinheinz4Thomas Stamm5Claudius Middelberg6Yann Janssens7University of MünsterHannover Medical School (MHH)University of MünsterUniversity of MünsterUniversity of MünsterUniversity of MünsterUniversity of MünsterUniversité Paris CitéAbstract Background The 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). Methods This 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. Results In 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. Conclusions There 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.https://doi.org/10.1186/s40510-025-00568-0CrossbiteSurgically assisted rapid palatal expansionSurgically assisted rapid maxillary expansionDentoalveolar compensationExpansionMandibular constriction |
| spellingShingle | Jonas Q. Schmid Lara Bettenhäuser-Hartung Moritz Kanemeier Ariane Hohoff Johannes Kleinheinz Thomas Stamm Claudius Middelberg Yann Janssens 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 Progress in Orthodontics Crossbite Surgically assisted rapid palatal expansion Surgically assisted rapid maxillary expansion Dentoalveolar compensation Expansion Mandibular constriction |
| title | 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 |
| title_full | 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 |
| title_fullStr | 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 |
| title_full_unstemmed | 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 |
| title_short | 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 |
| title_sort | 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 |
| topic | Crossbite Surgically assisted rapid palatal expansion Surgically assisted rapid maxillary expansion Dentoalveolar compensation Expansion Mandibular constriction |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1186/s40510-025-00568-0 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT jonasqschmid theincidenceofgingivalrecessionwithnonsurgicalcrossbitecorrectionusingcompletelycustomizedlingualappliancesversussurgicallyassistedrapidpalatalexpansioninadultsacohortstudy AT larabettenhauserhartung theincidenceofgingivalrecessionwithnonsurgicalcrossbitecorrectionusingcompletelycustomizedlingualappliancesversussurgicallyassistedrapidpalatalexpansioninadultsacohortstudy AT moritzkanemeier theincidenceofgingivalrecessionwithnonsurgicalcrossbitecorrectionusingcompletelycustomizedlingualappliancesversussurgicallyassistedrapidpalatalexpansioninadultsacohortstudy AT arianehohoff theincidenceofgingivalrecessionwithnonsurgicalcrossbitecorrectionusingcompletelycustomizedlingualappliancesversussurgicallyassistedrapidpalatalexpansioninadultsacohortstudy AT johanneskleinheinz theincidenceofgingivalrecessionwithnonsurgicalcrossbitecorrectionusingcompletelycustomizedlingualappliancesversussurgicallyassistedrapidpalatalexpansioninadultsacohortstudy AT thomasstamm theincidenceofgingivalrecessionwithnonsurgicalcrossbitecorrectionusingcompletelycustomizedlingualappliancesversussurgicallyassistedrapidpalatalexpansioninadultsacohortstudy AT claudiusmiddelberg theincidenceofgingivalrecessionwithnonsurgicalcrossbitecorrectionusingcompletelycustomizedlingualappliancesversussurgicallyassistedrapidpalatalexpansioninadultsacohortstudy AT yannjanssens theincidenceofgingivalrecessionwithnonsurgicalcrossbitecorrectionusingcompletelycustomizedlingualappliancesversussurgicallyassistedrapidpalatalexpansioninadultsacohortstudy AT jonasqschmid incidenceofgingivalrecessionwithnonsurgicalcrossbitecorrectionusingcompletelycustomizedlingualappliancesversussurgicallyassistedrapidpalatalexpansioninadultsacohortstudy AT larabettenhauserhartung incidenceofgingivalrecessionwithnonsurgicalcrossbitecorrectionusingcompletelycustomizedlingualappliancesversussurgicallyassistedrapidpalatalexpansioninadultsacohortstudy AT moritzkanemeier incidenceofgingivalrecessionwithnonsurgicalcrossbitecorrectionusingcompletelycustomizedlingualappliancesversussurgicallyassistedrapidpalatalexpansioninadultsacohortstudy AT arianehohoff incidenceofgingivalrecessionwithnonsurgicalcrossbitecorrectionusingcompletelycustomizedlingualappliancesversussurgicallyassistedrapidpalatalexpansioninadultsacohortstudy AT johanneskleinheinz incidenceofgingivalrecessionwithnonsurgicalcrossbitecorrectionusingcompletelycustomizedlingualappliancesversussurgicallyassistedrapidpalatalexpansioninadultsacohortstudy AT thomasstamm incidenceofgingivalrecessionwithnonsurgicalcrossbitecorrectionusingcompletelycustomizedlingualappliancesversussurgicallyassistedrapidpalatalexpansioninadultsacohortstudy AT claudiusmiddelberg incidenceofgingivalrecessionwithnonsurgicalcrossbitecorrectionusingcompletelycustomizedlingualappliancesversussurgicallyassistedrapidpalatalexpansioninadultsacohortstudy AT yannjanssens incidenceofgingivalrecessionwithnonsurgicalcrossbitecorrectionusingcompletelycustomizedlingualappliancesversussurgicallyassistedrapidpalatalexpansioninadultsacohortstudy |