Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
The purpose of the present study was to evaluate upper airway changes related to craniofacial changes induced by a facemask (FM) combined with Le Fort I osteotomy without down-fracture in Class III maxillary retrusion subjects (group 1) when compared with a similar group of subjects treated with traditional rapid palatal expansion and FM therapy. Pre- (T1) and post- (T2) protraction cephalometric radiographs of group 1 (10 females and 6 males; mean age 12.75 ± 1.91 years) and group 2 (7 females and 9 males; mean age 12 ± 1.7 years) were traced. The treatment duration was 149 ± 14 days (approximately 5 months) and 270 ± 46 days (approximately 9 months) for groups 1 and 2, respectively. A paired t-test for intergroup comparisons of values at T1, an independent samples t-test for intragroup comparisons of values at T1 and T2, and a non-parametric Mann-Whitney U-test for intergroup comparisons were used. To evaluate the relationship between changes in upper airway dimension and craniofacial morphology, a multiple-regression analysis was performed. Significant maxillary protraction along with clockwise rotation of the mandible was achieved in both groups. Counter-clockwise maxillary rotation was significant in group 1 (P < 0.05) but not in group 2. While nasopharyngeal measurements (PNS-ad1, PNS-ad2) showed significant increases (P < 0.05) as a result of treatment in both groups, oropharyngeal measurements did not change. Maxillary protraction, which was achieved in both groups but in a shorter period of time in group 2, improved nasopharyngeal but not oropharyngeal airway dimensions.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjr023 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!