Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Clinical Trial
. 2005 Mar;42(2):121-7.
doi: 10.1597/03-107.1.

A new protocol for maxillary protraction in cleft patients: repetitive weekly protocol of alternate rapid maxillary expansions and constrictions

Eric Jein-Wein Liou  1 , Wen-Ching Tsai
Affiliations
Clinical Trial

A new protocol for maxillary protraction in cleft patients: repetitive weekly protocol of alternate rapid maxillary expansions and constrictions

Eric Jein-Wein Liou et al. Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2005 Mar.

Abstract

Objective: It was hypothesized that, through a repetitive weekly protocol of Alternate Rapid Maxillary Expansions and Constrictions (Alt-RAMEC), the maxilla in cleft patients could be protracted more effectively than with a single course of rapid maxillary expansion (RME).

Methods: Twenty-six consecutive unilateral cleft lip and palate patients at the age of mixed dentition were included in this prospective clinical study. The rapid maxillary expansion group included the first 16 consecutive patients undergoing 1 week of rapid maxillary expansion (1 mm/day) followed by 5 months, 3 weeks of maxillary protraction. The Alternate Rapid Maxillary Expansions and Constrictions group included the next 10 consecutive patients undergoing 9 weeks of Alternate Rapid Maxillary Expansions and Constrictions followed by 3 months, 3 weeks of maxillary protraction. Daily activation of the weekly expansion or constriction was 1.0 mm. Two-hinged expanders and intraoral maxillary protraction springs were used in both groups. Treatment results were evaluated cephalometrically.

Results: The amount of maxillary anterior displacement by the 2-hinged expander in the Alternate Rapid Maxillary Expansions and Constrictions group was 3.0 +/- 0.9 mm at A point, significantly greater than the 1.6 +/- 1.0 mm in the rapid maxillary expansion group. The amount of maxillary advancement with intraoral protraction springs in the Alternate Rapid Maxillary Expansions and Constrictions group was 2.9 +/- 1.9 mm at A point, significantly greater than the 0.9 +/- 1.1 mm in the rapid maxillary expansion group. The overall amount of maxillary advancement in the Alternate Rapid Maxillary Expansions and Constrictions group was 5.8 +/- 2.3 mm at A point. This result remained stable, without significant relapse after 2 years.

Conclusions: Maxillary protraction using the 2-hinged expander, a repetitive weekly protocol of Alternate Rapid Maxillary Expansions and Constrictions, and intraoral protraction springs is most effective, with stable results at 2-year follow-up.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types