OBJECTIVE

This systematic review aimed to identify, evaluate, and provide an overview of the available literature regarding the use of miniscrews in the rapid maxillary expansion (RME) on the upper airway.

METHODS

The eligibility criteria were prospective trials that compared RME and miniscrew-assisted rapid maxillary expansion (MARPE) regarding airways. A search of studies in Medline (via PubMed), the Cochrane Library, Scopus and Scielo that measured the effects on the upper airway was conducted until May 8, 2022. Two reviewers independently selected the studies, extracted the data, and assessed the risk of bias for systematic reviews thanks to the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Reporting of this review was based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.

RESULTS

Out of 160 potentially eligible studies, 7 were considered for systematic review. The measurement of MARPE on airway was done with CBCT, rhinometry, and acoustic rhinomanometry. In total, 344 patients were assessed. Two included studies showed high risk of bias and the rest showed low to moderate risks of bias. Tooth-bone-borne RME significantly improved nasal airflow [(Mean difference (MD) 52.7cm/s, 95% confidence interval (95% CI) (9.0-96.4), P=0.020)], reduced nasal resistance (MD 0.20Pa/cm, 95% (0.38-0.02), P=0.028), Skeletal expansion at the level of the nasal cavity was significantly greater in the MARPE group. The magnitude of the expansion at the posterior level of the nasal cavity was almost two times higher in the tooth-bone-borne group [(MD) 1.75mm, 95% (1.16-2.35) and (MD) 0.78mm, 95% (0.11-1.45), P<0.001] CONCLUSIONS: The short-term airflow changes after MARPE seems promising. Additionally, MARPE is associated with greater skeletal maxillary expansion after retention, at various levels of the nasal cavity, compared to conventional RME.