IADR Abstract Archives
Comparison Between TAD-supported RME vs. Conventional RME for Palatal Expansion
Objectives: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the relationship between age and maturation at which a successful separation of the maxillary midpalatal suture (MPS) separation could be achieved, and if MPS could be improved with the utilization of a TAD-supported RME appliance.
Methods: Ninety-six consecutively treated subjects (mean age=13.8±2.6 years, 43 males, 53 females) exhibiting maxillary skeletal constriction underwent conventional RME treatment and thirteen (mean age=17.1±2.1 years, 7 males, 6 females) underwent RME treatment utilizing TADs. Subjects were also classified into pre-pubertal or post-pubertal groups based on maturation status. MPS separation was confirmed by development of a diastema between upper central incisors and using a maxillary occlusal radiograph. Statistical analysis consisted of chi-square test, Fisher’s test, the Wilcoxon rank-sum test, and simple linear regression (alpha=0.05).
Results: Of the 96 subjects treated with a conventional RME, 71.9% had a successful MPS separation. The mean/median age of subjects who had a separation was significantly lower than those who didn’t have a separation (13.0\13.2 vs. 15.7\14.8 years; p<0.001). In those who were pre-puberty, 96.4% had a MPS separation and in those who were post-puberty 62.1% had a MPS separation (p=0.001). Moreover, the mean/median months past puberty in those who had a MPS separation was significantly lower than in those who had no MPS separation (17.1\13 vs. 28.8\30 months; p=0.007). For every additional increase in age by a year, successful MPS separation decreased by an average of 14.1%. Of the 13 subjects treated with TAD-supported RME, all of them were post-puberty and 100% had a MPS separation.
Conclusions: TAD-supported RME is a viable option when treating post-pubertal adolescent patients. However, MPS separation is highly likely to occur in pre-pubertal patients treated with conventional RME. As a result, patient age and maturation status must be considered when deciding between conventional or TAD-supported RME treatment for MPS separation.
Methods: Ninety-six consecutively treated subjects (mean age=13.8±2.6 years, 43 males, 53 females) exhibiting maxillary skeletal constriction underwent conventional RME treatment and thirteen (mean age=17.1±2.1 years, 7 males, 6 females) underwent RME treatment utilizing TADs. Subjects were also classified into pre-pubertal or post-pubertal groups based on maturation status. MPS separation was confirmed by development of a diastema between upper central incisors and using a maxillary occlusal radiograph. Statistical analysis consisted of chi-square test, Fisher’s test, the Wilcoxon rank-sum test, and simple linear regression (alpha=0.05).
Results: Of the 96 subjects treated with a conventional RME, 71.9% had a successful MPS separation. The mean/median age of subjects who had a separation was significantly lower than those who didn’t have a separation (13.0\13.2 vs. 15.7\14.8 years; p<0.001). In those who were pre-puberty, 96.4% had a MPS separation and in those who were post-puberty 62.1% had a MPS separation (p=0.001). Moreover, the mean/median months past puberty in those who had a MPS separation was significantly lower than in those who had no MPS separation (17.1\13 vs. 28.8\30 months; p=0.007). For every additional increase in age by a year, successful MPS separation decreased by an average of 14.1%. Of the 13 subjects treated with TAD-supported RME, all of them were post-puberty and 100% had a MPS separation.
Conclusions: TAD-supported RME is a viable option when treating post-pubertal adolescent patients. However, MPS separation is highly likely to occur in pre-pubertal patients treated with conventional RME. As a result, patient age and maturation status must be considered when deciding between conventional or TAD-supported RME treatment for MPS separation.