Complications From Surgically Assisted Rapid Maxillary Expansion With HAAS and HYRAX Expanders

    loading  Checking for direct PDF access through Ovid


The current study aimed at comparing the number and type of undesired outcomes during and after the maxillary expansion performed with HYRAX and HAAS expanders. A total of 90 patients (41 males and 49 females, 45.6% and 54.4%, respectively) aged 18 to 59 (mean age of 26.1; standard deviation [SD] = 7.4) underwent subtotal Le Fort I osteotomy and pterygomaxillary disjunction following surgically assisted rapid maxillary expansion (SARME) carried out using HAAS (n = 29; 48.3% male and 51.7% female; mean age = 27: SD = 7.7) and HYRAX (n = 61; 44.3% male and 55.7% female; mean age = 26; SD = 7.2) expanders. Post-SARME dento-gingival, radiographic, and clinical undesired outcomes were evaluated. A total of 16 (17.8%) patients experienced at least 1 undesired outcome—7 (7.8%) and 9 (10.0%) in HAAS and HYRAX group, respectively. The most common undesired outcomes were radiographic asymmetric expansion—2 (2.2%) and 3 (3.3%) in HAAS and HYRAX group, respectively—followed by pain during out-of-clinic expansion 4 (4.4%) in HAAS group only—dental darkening 5 (5.5%) in HYRAX group, only, requiring root canal treatment, and local infection—2 (2.2%), 1 in each HAAS and HYRAX groups. Excepting for complications arising from the acrylic stop plate in HAAS expander, the number and severity of complications observed in the current study did not differ due to the use of HAAS and HYRAX appliances to perform maxillary expansion. Hygiene issues do not rule out the use of HAAS. The wider maxillary expansion performed, the more frequent are the cases of asymmetric expansion.

Related Topics

    loading  Loading Related Articles