Abstract
There is no consensus in the literature regarding which rapid maxillary expansion (RME) design or activation rate benefits the patients the most. Therefore, the primary aim of this systematic review was to see whether there is a difference in the skeletal and dentoalveolar effects of different RME appliances in children and growing adolescents. The secondary aim was to see whether these effects are different when using different activation protocols for these appliances.
The search was done in three databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science). The following inclusion criteria were used: randomized controlled trial, prospective controlled studies, 15 or more patients in each study, human subjects up to 18 years of age, and RME effects had to be assessed by computed tomography/cone beam computed tomography.
Quality of the methodology was classified according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) guidelines as high, moderate, or low.
The search resulted in 145 titles and abstracts; 109 of them were excluded based on pre-established criteria. Thirty-six full-text articles were assessed for eligibility and 18 of which satisfied the inclusion criteria. Finally, seven articles were deemed eligible for full inclusion and revealed that all appliances and protocols showed significant expansion in the mid-palatal suture. No evidence was found for the cause of dental tipping.
In this systematic review, having different age groups in each study and using different anatomical landmarks and outcome measures for assessing the skeletal and dental effects made it difficult to conduct a meta-analysis.
There is moderate evidence that all designs produce significant expansion at the mid-palatal suture. However, lack of studies comparing appliances and protocols has been found. Finally, no evidence-based conclusions could be drawn about the appliance effect on teeth tipping.
No appliance appears to be superior when it comes to expansion in the mid-palatal suture. Therefore, the tooth-borne appliance might be preferable until further high-quality studies conclude otherwise.
The project was funded through the Department of Orthodontics, Postgraduate Dental Education Center, Region Örebro County, Örebro, Sweden.
This systematic review was not registered in any external databases.