Abstract
We chose studies that compared effects determined by palatal expansion using a rapid palatal expander, expander on palatal screws, and leaf expander. Reports assessed for eligibility are 26 and the reports excluded were 11. A final number of 15 studies were included in the review for qualitative analysis. Clinically and radiographically, the outcomes are similar to those obtained with RME and SME appliances; Therefore, it might be a useful treatment choice as an alternative to RME/SME equipment in cases of poor patient compliance or specific situations. Finally, all of the devices studied produce meaningful skeletal growth of the palate. The use of skeletally anchored devices does, without a doubt, promote larger and more successful growth in adolescent patients.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
