Dehiscence and buccal bone thickness after rapid maxillary expansion in young patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate.

INTRODUCTION: The present study aimed to evaluate the consequences of rapid maxillary expansion in the buccal bone thickness and dehiscence of subjects with unilateral cleft lip and palate. METHODS: This prospective cohort study consisted of 30 participants, 20 males and 10 females, between 8 and 15 years old. Participants were allocated into 3 groups, according to the type of maxillary constriction, and were treated with different types of expanders: G1, hyrax; G2, fan-type; G3, inverted mini-hyrax. Cone-beam computed tomography scans were performed immediately before treatment and after 90 days of retention. Linear measurements were obtained by the same calibrated and blinded examiner. RESULTS: An average of 0.8 mm decrease in buccal bone thickness (P <0.001) and a 0.5 mm increase in dehiscence (P <0.001) were observed. There was no significant difference between the cleft and noncleft side for all variables (P >0.05), as there was no significant difference between groups (P >0.05). CONCLUSION: The findings in this study allow the conclusion that the orthopedic forces of rapid maxillary expansion lead to a decrease in the posterior buccal bone volume in unilateral cleft lip and palate patients.

The impact of rapid maxillary expansion on maxillary first molar root morphology of cleft subjects.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this prospective cohort study was to determine the effects of rapid maxillary expansion (RME) on the first molar roots of cleft lip and palate subjects along different root development stages. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Thirty participants with unilateral cleft lip and palate were divided into three groups (n = 10), according to the type of expander used: Hyrax, iMini and Fan-type. A cone beam CT scan was performed before (T1) and 3 months after stabilization of the appliance (T2). Measurements of root lengths of the first permanent maxillary molars were taken to evaluate root development and external apical root resorption (EARR). RESULTS: Roots presenting open apexes before treatment exhibited a statistically significant increase in root length after treatment (P < .001). Conversely, there were no significant changes in the root length of roots that had closed apexes at the beginning of treatment (P > .05). Furthermore, there were no differences among groups, or correlation between cleft side and gender was found vis-à-vis to changes in the root length (p > .05). CONCLUSIONS: Orthopaedic forces of RME were neither able to interrupt the root development process nor to cause EARR in cleft subjects. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: As the RME is the most common orthodontic procedure in patients with cleft lip and palate, understanding its impact on dental structures is of fundamental importance.