Analysis of the dentoalveolar effects of slow and rapid maxillary expansion in complete bilateral cleft lip and palate patients: a randomized clinical trial.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to compare the dentoalveolar effects of slow (SME) and rapid (RME) maxillary expansions in patients with complete bilateral cleft lip and palate (BCLP). MATERIAL AND METHODS: A sample of 50 patients with BCLP and maxillary arch constriction was randomly and equally allocated into two groups. Group SME comprised patients (mean age of 8.8 years) treated with quad-helix appliance. Group RME comprised individuals (mean age of 8.9 years) treated with Hyrax expander. Digital dental models obtained immediately pre-expansion (T1) and 6 months after the active expansion period (T2) were used for measuring maxillary dental arch widths, arch perimeter, arch length, palatal depth, buccolingual inclination of posterior teeth and differential amount of expansion accomplished at the canine and molar regions. Inter-phase and intergroup comparisons were performed using paired t tests and t tests, respectively (p < 0.05). RESULTS: SME and RME caused significant increase of arch widths and arch perimeter. Arch length and palatal depth decreased nonsignificantly with SME but significantly with RME. Buccal tooth inclination was significant only for maxillary deciduous canines in both groups. The quad-helix appliance showed a significant differential expansion between anterior and posterior regions. No differences were observed between SME and RME for all variables. CONCLUSIONS: Differences were not found between the dentoalveolar effects of SME and RME in patients with BCLP. SME demanded a greater therapy time compared to RME. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Both expansion procedures can be similarly indicated to correct maxillary arch constriction in patients with BCLP in the mixed dentition.

Influence of rapid maxillary expansion on nocturnal enuresis in children.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the influence of rapid maxillary expansion (RME) on nocturnal enuresis (NE) in children to discuss whether RME can be indicated as an alternative treatment for NE in those patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An electronic search was performed in the following databases: PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Science Direct, Google Scholar and LILACS. The literature review was blindly performed by two reviewers. References of each selected study were manually searched to identify articles that were not found by the electronic search. Kappa statistics were used to analyze interexaminer agreement after the selection of the articles. After reading the selected full-text articles, the studies that met the inclusion criteria were assessed qualitatively using the Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) and the Revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized controlled trials-2 (RoB 2). The certainty level of evidence was assessed through the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation tool. Kappa tests were used to analyze the interexaminer concordance level after the quality assessment of the studies. RESULTS: A total of 488 articles were found; however, after applying the inclusion and exclusion criteria, only 8 studies were selected for the systematic review. A low certainty level of evidence suggested that RME seems to promote a variable reduction in frequency or a remission of NE in children in both the short (4, 6, and 8 months) and long term (13, 36, 48, and 120 months). CONCLUSIONS: Based on currently available information, RME seems to promote an improvement in NE in children. However, the low quality of the existing evidence weakens the recommendation.

Cephalometric evaluation of rapid and slow maxillary expansion in patients with BCLP: Secondary data analysis from a randomized clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the dentoskeletal effects of rapid (RME) and slow (SME) maxillary expansion in patients with bilateral complete cleft lip and palate (BCLP). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of a previous randomized controlled trial (RCT). Forty-six patients (34 male, 12 female) with BCLP and posterior crossbite (mean age of 9.2 years) were randomly assigned to two study groups. Group RME comprised subjects treated with Haas/Hyrax expander. Group SME included patients treated with quad-helix appliance. Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) was performed before expansion (T1) and after appliance removal at the end of a 6-month retention period (T2) for a previous RCT that compared the transverse skeletal effects of RME and SME. CBCT-derived cephalometric images were generated and cephalometric analysis was performed using Dolphin Imaging Software (Chatsworth, Calif). Intergroup comparisons were performed using t tests (P < .05). RESULTS: Baseline forms were similar between groups. No significant differences between RME and SME groups were found. CONCLUSIONS: Rapid and slow maxillary expansion produced similar sagittal and vertical changes in patients with BCLP. Both Haas/Hyrax and quad-helix appliances can be used in patients with vertical facial pattern. Clinical relevance: RME and SME can be equally indicated in the treatment of maxillary arch constriction in patients with BCLP.