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
. 2023 Sep 25;53(5):289-297.
doi: 10.4041/kjod23.056. Epub 2023 Sep 5.

Pattern of microimplant displacement during maxillary skeletal expander treatment: A cone-beam computed tomography study

Ney Paredes  1   2 , Ausama Gargoum  2 , Ramon Dominguez-Mompell  3 , Ozge Colak  4 , Joseph Bui  2 , Tam Duong  2 , Maya Giannetti  5 , Fernanda Silva  2 , Kendra Brooks  2 , Won Moon  6   7
Affiliations

Pattern of microimplant displacement during maxillary skeletal expander treatment: A cone-beam computed tomography study

Ney Paredes et al. Korean J Orthod. .

Abstract

Objective: To analyze the microimplant (MI) displacement pattern on treatment with a maxillary skeletal expander (MSE) using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT).

Methods: Thirty-nine participants (12 males and 27 females; mean age, 18.2 ± 4.2 years) were treated successfully with the MSE II appliance. Their pre- and post-expansion CBCT data were superimposed. The pre- and post-expansion anterior and posterior inter-MI angles, neck and apical inter-MI distance, plate angle, palatal bone thickness at the MI positions, and suture opening at the MI positions were measured and compared.

Results: The jackscrew plate was slightly bent in both anterior and posterior areas. There was no significant difference in the extent of suture opening between the anterior and posterior MIs (p > 0.05). The posterior MI to hemiplate line was greater than that anteriorly (p < 0.05). The apical distance between the posterior MIs was greater than that anteriorly (p < 0.05). The palatal thickness at the anterior MIs was significantly greater than that posteriorly (p > 0.01).

Conclusions: In the coronal plane, the angulation between the anterior MIs in relation to the jackscrew plate was greater than that between the posterior MIs owing to the differential palatal bone thickness.

Keywords: Bone-anchored maxillary expander; Expansion; Maxillary skeletal expander; Microimplant-assisted rapid palatal expansion.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

No potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Cone-beam computed tomography landmarks for MSE fabrication. A, The green line on the axial view is at the level of the greater extension of the zygomatic buttress (seen in the coronal view). B, The orange line on the axial view corresponds to the midpalatal suture. Planned MSE jackscrew position on the axial and sagittal views. C, Bone thickness measurements on the coronal and sagittal cuts at the level of insertion of the right anterior microimplant. MSE, maxillary skeletal expander.
Figure 2
Figure 2
MSE II device (Biomaterials Korea, Seoul, Korea). One MSE II expansion turn is equivalent to 0.133 mm of activation of the jackscrew. One revolution is equivalent to 6 turns or activation of the jackscrew by 0.8 mm. MSE II-12 indicates that the expansion size is 12 mm, which is equivalent to 90 turns. MSE, maxillary skeletal expander.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Anterior-coronal-microimplant section identified on the coronal view.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Parameters evaluated in the study. IMIA, inter-microimplant angle; IMIAD, inter-microimplant apical distance; SOMI, suture opening at microimplant level; PTMI, palatal thickness at microimplant level; PA, plate angle; MIPA, microimplant to plate angle; IMIND, inter-microimplant neck distance.
Figure 5
Figure 5
A, MSE expansion showing a more parallel displacement of the anterior and posterior microimplants. B, MSE expansion displaying a wider displacement pattern for the posterior microimplants. MSE, maxillary skeletal expander.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Baccetti T, Franchi L, Cameron CG, McNamara JA., Jr Treatment timing for rapid maxillary expansion. Angle Orthod. 2001;71:343–50. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11605867/ - PubMed
    1. Kiliç N, Kiki A, Oktay H. A comparison of dentoalveolar inclination treated by two palatal expanders. Eur J Orthod. 2008;30:67–72. doi: 10.1093/ejo/cjm099. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjm099. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Olmez H, Akin E, Karaçay S. Multitomographic evaluation of the dental effects of two different rapid palatal expansion appliances. Eur J Orthod. 2007;29:379–85. doi: 10.1093/ejo/cjm034. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjm034. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Kartalian A, Gohl E, Adamian M, Enciso R. Cone-beam computerized tomography evaluation of the maxillary dentoskeletal complex after rapid palatal expansion. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2010;138:486–92. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2008.10.025. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2008.10.025. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Lagravère MO, Carey J, Heo G, Toogood RW, Major PW. Transverse, vertical, and anteroposterior changes from bone-anchored maxillary expansion vs traditional rapid maxillary expansion: a randomized clinical trial. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2010;137:304.e1–12. discussion 304–5. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2009.09.016. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2009.09.016. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources