Scientific evidence showed that rapid maxillary expansion (RME) affects naso-maxillary complex, increasing nasal width and volume. This study aimed to evaluate nasal changes induced by rapid maxillary expansion with different anchorage and appliance design by using low dose and cone beam computed tomography. A total of 44 patients (20 males, mean age 8y 8 m ± 1y 2 m; 24 females mean age 8y 2 m ± 1y 4 m) were included in the investigation and divided into three groups according to the appliance: Hyrax-type expander anchored to permanent teeth, modified Hyrax-type expander anchored to deciduous teeth, modified Haas-type expander anchored to deciduous teeth. Maxillary expansion was performed until overcorrection and the expander was passively kept in situ for 7 months at least. All patients had three-dimensional imaging before expansion (T0) and after the retention period (T1). Nasal floor width, nasal wall width, maxillary inter-molar width were measured by means of Mimics software. The paired sample t-test was employed to assess the significance of the differences between the time points; the analysis of variance test (ANOVA) was used to compare differences between groups. The statistical analysis revealed significant differences between T0 and T1 for each recorded measurement in each group; no significant differences were found by comparing groups. Rapid maxillary expansion produces a significant skeletal transverse expansion of nasal region in growing patients. No significant differences in nasal effects are expected when the appliance is anchored onto deciduous teeth, with or without the palatal acrylic coverage.

Background and objectives: The aim of the present paper is to use low-dose computed tomography (CT) to evaluate the changes in the midpalatal suture density in patients treated with rapid maxillary expansion (RME) and slow maxillary expansion (SME). Materials and Methods: Thirty patients (mean age 10.2 ± 1.2 years) were retrospectively selected from the existing sample of a previous study. For each patient, a low-dose computed tomography examination was performed before appliance placement (T0) and at the end of retention (T1), seven months later. Using the collected images, the midpalatal suture density was evaluated in six regions of interest. Results: No significant differences were found between the timepoints in the rapid maxillary expansion group. Three out of six regions of interest showed significant decreases between the timepoints in the slow maxillary expansion group. No significant differences were found in comparisons between the two groups. Conclusions: The midpalatal suture density showed no significant differences when rapid maxillary expansion groups were compared to slow maxillary expansion groups, suggesting that a similar rate of suture reorganization occurs despite different expansion protocols.