Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 19, 2026
Author Spotlight: Development of a Novel Finite Element Analysis Model for Improved Orthognathic Surgical Techniques
Published on: October 20, 2023
Differential treatment effects of two anchorage systems for rapid maxillary expansion: a retrospective cephalometric
Jan Hourfar1,2, Gero Stefan Michael Kinzinger3,4, Björn Ludwig4,5
1Orthodontic Practice, Reinheim, Germany.
Objectives:
The purpose of this study was to compare cephalometric changes resulting from treatment with two appliances for rapid maxillary expansion: (1) a strictly tooth-borne appliance and (2) a combined tooth- and bone-borne appliance.
Patients And Methods:
Pre- and posttreatment lateral cephalograms of 100 patients were analyzed by cephalometry. Of these patients, 50 were treated with strictly tooth-borne and another 50 with combined tooth- and bone-borne appliances. Mean pretreatment age was 13.04 ± 4.82 years, and mean treatment duration was 7.12 ± 2.37 months. To identify any implications for clinical therapy, additional subgroups were formed based on the pretreatment cephalometric findings for skeletal Class I (0° < ANB ≤ 4°) or Class III (ANB ≤0°). Paired t-tests were used for intragroup and analysis of variance (ANOVA) for intergroup comparisons. Results were considered statistically significant at p ≤ 0.05.
Results:
Both appliance types resulted in significant cephalometric changes in the maxilla and mandible. Compared to the strictly tooth-borne appliances, the combined tooth- and bone-borne appliances were found to cause more pronounced advancement of the maxilla (SNA angle) notably among the Class III patients.
Conclusions:
Hybrid (combined tooth- and bone-borne) appliances for rapid maxillary expansion might be preferable in the treatment of skeletal Class III patients, since they possibly exert a more pronounced skeletal effect on the sagittal position of the maxilla.
