Related Experiment Video
Updated: Dec 21, 2025
Author Spotlight: Development of a Novel Finite Element Analysis Model for Improved Orthognathic Surgical Techniques
Published on: October 20, 2023
Is There a Significant Difference in Relapse and Complication Rate of Surgically Assisted Rapid Palatal Expansion
Oliver Ploder1, Heinz Winsauer2, Katharina Juengling3
1Head of Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Academic Teaching Hospital Feldkirch, Feldkirch, Austria.
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.
