Cleft lip and palate patients usually have deficient maxilla due to postsurgical scars. The aim this study was to compare the effectiveness of miniplates-anchored face-mask therapy versus intermaxillary elastics to miniplates for maxillary traction in cleft lip and palate patients.Methods:
This clinical trial included 11 prepubertal patients with cleft lip and palate. Initially, a w-arch expander was cemented and activated 3 mm per month to overcorrect the crossbite. Then, the patients were divided into 2 groups: mini-plate-anchored face-mask (n = 5): 2 miniplates were placed in the maxilla and the patients were instructed to wear a face-mask for 12 to 14 hours/per day. Intermaxillary elastics to miniplates (n = 6): 2 miniplates were inserted in the maxilla; 1 on each side and 2 miniplates were placed in the anterior mandible on both sides. Intermaxillary elastics with a force of 250 g per side were attached to the hooks. Cephalometric parameters before treatment (T1) and after achieving positive overjet (T2) were compared between the 2 groups. Fisher exact, paired, and independent t tests were used for statistical comparison.Results:
At T1 or T2 there was not a significant difference between the 2 groups in the skeletal, dental, and soft tissue variables.Conclusion:
According to results of our preliminary study, intermaxillary elastics to miniplates might have a promising effect as an alternative for face mask therapy in maxillary protraction of cleft lip and palate patients.