ArticleProgress in orthodontics2022
Midpalatal suture bone repair after miniscrew-assisted rapid palatal expansion in adults.
Article in Progress in orthodontics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Bone-Screw-Force Interactions in Palatal Orthodontic Mini-Implants: A Scoping Review and Decision Framework for Primary Stability and Biomechanically Driven Site Selection.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2026Review
- Evaluation of midpalatal suture maturation in young adults using cone-beam computed tomography.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Maxillary Expansion With C-Expander Using Digital Planning and CBCT-Based Surgical Guidance: A Case Report.Case reports in dentistry · 2026Article
- Applications of the Novel Midpalatal Piezocorticotomy Guide for MARPE Midfacial Skeletal Expansion.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Article
- The Clinical Management of Traumatic Palatal Ulcers in an Adolescent Patient: A Common Lesion in Mini-Implant-Assisted Rapid Maxillary Expansion.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Article
- Miniscrew-Assisted Rapid Palatal Expansion: A Scoping Review of Influencing Factors, Side Effects, and Soft Tissue Alterations.Biomedicines · 2024Article
- Evaluation of Palatal Thickness for the Placement of MARPE Device among a Cohort of Iraqi-Kurdish Population: A Retrospective CBCT Study.International journal of dentistry · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMidpalatal suture (MPS) repair in growing patients after RPE has been previously reported. However, differences between young and adult patients for timing and pattern of MPS repair after rapid maxillary expansion are expected. The aim of this study was to evaluate the midpalatal suture repair pattern after miniscrew-assisted rapid palatal expansion (MARPE) in adult patients. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe study included 21 patients (six males, 15 females) successfully treated with MARPE with a mean initial age of 29.1 years of age (SD = 8.0; range = 20.1-45.1). MPS repair was evaluated using maxillary axial and coronal sections derived from CBCT exams taken 16 months after the expansion (SD = 5.9). Objective and subjective assessments of MPS repair were performed. Objective assessments were performed measuring MPS bone density at anterior, median and posterior region of hard palate. Pre-expansion and post-retention bone density changes were evaluated using paired t tests (p < 0.05). Midpalatal suture bone repair was scored 0 to 3 considering, respectively, the complete absence of bone repair in the MPS, the repair of less than 50% of the MPS, the repair of more than 50% of the MPS and the complete repair of the MPS. Intra- and interexaminer reliability evaluation were assessed using Kappa coefficient.
resultsThe objective evaluation showed a significant higher bone density at the pre-expansion stage in all palatal regions. The reliability of the subjective method was adequate with intra- and interexaminer agreements varying from 0.807 to 0.904. Scores 1, 2 and 3 were found in 19.05%, 38.09% and 42.86% of the sample, respectively. The most common region demonstrating absence of bone repair was the middle third. The anterior third of the midpalatal suture was repaired in all patients.
conclusionsA decreased bone density was observed after the retention period when compared to pre-expansion stage. Most adult patients demonstrated incomplete repair of the midpalatal suture 16 months after MARPE. However, adequate bone repair covering more than half of the hard palate extension was observed in 80.95% of the patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.