Can different osteotomies have an influence on surgically assisted rapid maxillary expansion? A systematic review

Abstract

Abstract The purpose of this study was to systematically review the randomized and non-randomized clinical trials (RCT; nRCT) concerning the different available osteotomies for surgically assisted rapid maxillary expansion (SARME): pterygomaxillary disjunction (SARME + PD vs SARME-PD) and segmental Le Fort I osteotomy (2-piece vs 3-piece). Outcomes focused on skeletal, dental, upper airway changes, complications, and relapse. Two authors investigated five databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, Scopus, Web of Science) until August 2023. The Cochrane Collaboration Tool and the Newcastle–Ottawa scale were used for the quality assessment of the included RCTs and nRCTs, respectively. A total of 554 articles were retrieved and after duplicates removing and full-text reading, 40 studies were included. Two RCTs showed a low risk of bias, one an unclear risk and one a high risk. Among the non-RCTs, 15 studies showed a good quality, while 21 exhibited a fair quality score. SARME + PD resulted in more homogeneous posterior bone expansion, with minimal dental effects. No difference between 2-piece and 3-piece in asymmetric expansion was observed, although 3SO showed 1–2 mm of more transverse increase. The oropharynx minimum cross-sectional area, the nasopharynx and the oropharynx volume were greater in SARME + PD. Both dental and bone relapse can occur but no differences between the groups were observed. All osteotomies guaranteed a correction of transverse maxillary deficiency. Lower side effects were described in SARME + PD. Two-piece and 3-piece segmental Le Fort I osteotomies did not show any differences in the symmetry and amount of expansion.

Keywords

• Maxillary expansion
• Surgically assisted rapid maxillary expansion
• Pterygomaxillary disjunction
• Segmental Le Fort I osteotomy