Is There a Significant Difference in Relapse and Complication Rate of Surgically Assisted Rapid Palatal Expansion Using Tooth-Borne, Bone-Borne, and Orthodontic Mini-Implant–Borne Appliances?

Oliver Ploder, Heinz Winsauer, Katharina Juengling, Florian Grill, Oliver Bissinger, Klaus Dietrich Wolff, Andreas Kolk

Publikation: Beitrag in FachzeitschriftArtikelBegutachtung

7 Zitate (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: For surgically assisted rapid palatal expansion (SARPE), studies comparing different devices are missing. The aim was to evaluate expansion, relapse, and the complication rates for 3 different appliances. Patients and Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, tooth-borne (TB, n = 29), bone-borne (BB, n = 12), or orthodontic mini-implant (OMI)–borne (n = 13) appliances were used for SARPE in 2 clinical centers. Patients presenting with a maxillary width discrepancy greater than 5 mm were included. Measurements of cast models and radiographs were performed preoperatively, immediately after consolidation, and at 1 year postoperatively. All distances were measured between canines, premolars, and molars. Complications (tooth damage, infection, technical failure) were evaluated. The outcome variables were expansion, relapse, and complications. Type of appliance was selected as predictor variable. Within- and between-group differences regarding expansion, relapse, and complications for the 3 appliances were statistically analyzed. Results: In 54 patients (aged 28.8 ± 8.6 years), mean expansion (±standard deviation) for the TB, BB, and OMI appliances immediately after consolidation was 5.29 ± 1.39 mm, 5.22 ± 1.72 mm, and 3.81 ± 2.19 mm, respectively, at the dental level, and 5.51 ± 1.40 mm, 4.66 ± 2.03 mm, and 3.51 ± 1.66 mm, respectively, at the bone level. Mean (±standard deviation) relapse for the TB, BB, and OMI appliances at 1 year postoperatively measured 1.44 ± 1.01 mm, 0.76 ± 1.37 mm, and 0.27 ± 1.63 mm, respectively, at the tooth level and 1.19 ± 0.93 mm, 0.71 ± 0.96 mm, and 0.12 ± 1.56 mm, respectively, at the bone level. Analysis of variance and the Tukey test showed significant differences between the TB and OMI appliances for expansion and relapse (P =.034 and P =.024, respectively). The overall complication rate differed significantly (P <.001), with rates of 17.2%, 66.7%, and 15.4% for the TB, BB, and OMI appliances, respectively. Conclusions: BB and OMI appliances resulted in less relapse. Owing to the high complication rate, the further use of BB appliances is questionable.

OriginalspracheEnglisch
Seiten (von - bis)213-224
Seitenumfang12
FachzeitschriftJournal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
Jahrgang79
Ausgabenummer1
DOIs
PublikationsstatusVeröffentlicht - Jan. 2021
Extern publiziertJa

Fingerprint

Untersuchen Sie die Forschungsthemen von „Is There a Significant Difference in Relapse and Complication Rate of Surgically Assisted Rapid Palatal Expansion Using Tooth-Borne, Bone-Borne, and Orthodontic Mini-Implant–Borne Appliances?“. Zusammen bilden sie einen einzigartigen Fingerprint.

Dieses zitieren