INTRODUCTION: Rapid palatal expansion (RPE) is a well-established orthodontic technique for correcting transverse maxillary constriction. In patients with cleft palate, surgical scarring, skeletal changes, and prior hospital experiences may affect pain perception. However, even in patients without cleft palate, the pain response can vary due to clinical and psychological factors. This prospective, multicenter observational study aims to assess perceived pain and the frequency of side effects during RPE in pediatric patients, comparing those with craniofacial malformations (cleft palate/cleft lip and palate) to patients without congenital anomalies. Variables considered include the type of expander used (Hyrax or Haas), the anchorage site (primary or permanent teeth), and the use of analgesics. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study initially included 167 patients, reduced to 152 (90.9%) after excluding 15 cases with fewer than 28 activations to ensure treatment uniformity. The final sample consisted of 105 patients without cleft palate (69.1%) and 47 with cleft palate (30.9%). Two types of expanders were used: Hyrax (n=109; 71.7%) and Haas (n=43; 28.3%). Among patients without cleft palate treated with Hyrax, anchorage was on primary teeth (40.0%) or permanent teeth (60.0%), while among those with cleft palate it was on primary (65.5%) or permanent teeth (34.5%). For Haas expanders, anchorage in non-syndromic patients was on primary teeth (44.0%) or permanent teeth (56.0%), and in syndromic patients on primary (61.1%) or permanent teeth (38.9%). Pain and functional discomfort (difficulty swallowing or speaking, increased salivation, nasal bleeding) were recorded daily using a structured questionnaire and the Wong-Baker scale. Analgesic use was also monitored. RESULTS: The Haas expander showed a more uniform tolerability profile between groups, with no statistically significant differences in mean overall pain (non-syndromic 0.94 ±0.75 vs syndromic 0.70 ±0.91; p=0.2037), and a rapid decrease within the first week. In contrast, the Hyrax expander showed significant differences: mean overall pain was higher in patients without cleft palate (1.38 ±0.64) compared to those with cleft palate (0.98 ±1.21; p=0.0003), with higher initial daily peaks (approximately 4.5 vs 2.6). Among patients without cleft palate, the Hyrax was associated with more frequent difficulty swallowing (51.25% vs 6.9%; odds ratio=14.22; p=0.0006). Nasal bleeding with Hyrax showed a nearly significant trend (p=0.052), occurring only in non-syndromic patients (12.5%) and absent in syndromic patients. With the Haas expander, nasal bleeding was sporadic, with no significant differences (p=0.064), observed only in non-syndromic patients (20%). Analysis of the anchorage site revealed that in patients without cleft palate, daily mean pain was significantly higher with anchorage on primary teeth compared to permanent teeth (p=0.0020). No significant differences emerged for anchorage on permanent teeth alone (p=0.6823). Overall analgesic use was limited but higher in non-syndromic patients (18.1%) compared to syndromic patients (8.5%). CONCLUSIONS: The results highlight the importance of personalized treatment planning in pediatric RPE. The Haas expander demonstrated more uniform tolerability, while the Hyrax showed significant differences in pain and discomfort in patients without cleft palate. Anchorage type affected pain only in non-syndromic patients with primary dentition. These findings emphasize the need to carefully consider the presence of cleft palate, the type of expander, and dental characteristics to optimize patient comfort and treatment adherence. Further studies with larger samples and more objective pain assessment tools are recommended.
INTRODUZIONE: L’espansione palatale rapida (RPE) è una tecnica ortodontica consolidata per correggere la contrazione trasversale del mascellare superiore. Nei pazienti con palatoschisi, cicatrici chirurgiche, modifiche scheletriche e pregressa esperienza ospedaliera possono influire sulla percezione del dolore. Tuttavia, anche nei pazienti senza palatoschisi la risposta algica può variare per fattori clinici e psicologici. Questo studio osservazionale prospettico e multicentrico ha l’obiettivo di valutare il dolore percepito e la frequenza di sintomi collaterali durante la RPE in pazienti pediatrici, confrontando soggetti con malformazioni cranio-facciali (palatoschisi/labiopalatoschisi) e pazienti senza anomalie congenite. Vengono considerate variabili come il tipo di espansore (Hyrax o Haas), il sito di ancoraggio (denti decidui o permanenti) e l’uso di analgesici. MATERIALI E METODI: Lo studio ha incluso inizialmente 167 pazienti, ridotti a 152 (90.9%) dopo l’esclusione di 15 casi con meno di 28 attivazioni per assicurare omogeneità di trattamento. Il campione finale comprendeva 105 pazienti senza palatoschisi (69.1%) e 47 con palatoschisi (30.9%).Sono stati utilizzati due tipi di espansori: Hyrax (n=109; 71.7%) e Haas (n=43; 28.3%). Nei pazienti senza palatoschisi trattati con Hyrax, l’ancoraggio era su decidui (40.0%) o permanenti (60.0%), mentre nei pazienti con palatoschisi su decidui (65.5%) o permanenti (34.5%). Per Haas, l’ancoraggio sui non sindromici era su decidui (44.0%) o permanenti (56.0%), e sui sindromici su decidui (61.1%) o permanenti (38.9%). Il dolore e i disagi funzionali (difficoltà a deglutire o parlare, salivazione aumentata, sanguinamento nasale) sono stati registrati quotidianamente con questionario strutturato e scala Wong-Baker. È stato anche monitorato l’uso di farmaci analgesici. RISULTATI: L’espansore Haas ha mostrato un profilo di tollerabilità più omogeneo tra i gruppi, senza differenze statisticamente significative nel dolore medio complessivo (non sindromici 0.94 ±0.75 vs sindromici 0.70 ±0.91; p=0.2037), con calo rapido entro la prima settimana. Al contrario, l’Hyrax ha evidenziato differenze significative: il dolore medio complessivo era maggiore nei pazienti senza palatoschisi (1.38 ±0.64) rispetto a quelli con palatoschisi (0.98 ±1.21; p=0.0003), con picchi giornalieri iniziali più elevati (circa 4.5 vs 2.6). Nei pazienti senza palatoschisi, l’Hyrax ha causato più spesso difficoltà a deglutire (51.25% vs 6.9%; odds ratio=14.22; p=0.0006). Il sanguinamento nasale con Hyrax ha mostrato una tendenza quasi significativa (p=0.052), presente solo nei non sindromici (12.5%) e assente nei sindromici. Con Haas il fenomeno è stato sporadico, senza differenze significative (p=0.064), osservato solo nei non sindromici (20%). L’analisi del sito di ancoraggio ha evidenziato nei pazienti senza palatoschisi un dolore medio giornaliero significativamente più alto con ancoraggio su dentizione decidua rispetto ai permanenti (p=0.0020). Non sono emerse differenze significative per l’ancoraggio su elementi permanenti (p=0.6823). L’uso di analgesici è stato complessivamente limitato, ma maggiore nei non sindromici (18.1%) rispetto ai sindromici (8.5%). CONCLUSIONI: I risultati evidenziano l’importanza di personalizzare la pianificazione terapeutica nella RPE pediatrica. L’espansore Haas ha garantito una tollerabilità più omogenea, mentre l’Hyrax ha mostrato differenze significative di dolore e disagi nei pazienti senza palatoschisi. Il tipo di ancoraggio ha inciso sul dolore solo nei non sindromici con dentizione decidua. Questi dati sottolineano la necessità di considerare attentamente la presenza di palatoschisi, il tipo di espansore e le caratteristiche dentarie per ottimizzare comfort e adesione al trattamento. Sono raccomandati ulteriori studi con campioni più ampi e strumenti di misurazione più oggettivi del dolore.
Espansione rapida del mascellare superiore in pazienti pediatrici con e senza palatoschisi: studio osservazionale prospettico sul dolore percepito e disagi associati
BOUTARBOUCHE, AYOUB
2024/2025
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Rapid palatal expansion (RPE) is a well-established orthodontic technique for correcting transverse maxillary constriction. In patients with cleft palate, surgical scarring, skeletal changes, and prior hospital experiences may affect pain perception. However, even in patients without cleft palate, the pain response can vary due to clinical and psychological factors. This prospective, multicenter observational study aims to assess perceived pain and the frequency of side effects during RPE in pediatric patients, comparing those with craniofacial malformations (cleft palate/cleft lip and palate) to patients without congenital anomalies. Variables considered include the type of expander used (Hyrax or Haas), the anchorage site (primary or permanent teeth), and the use of analgesics. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study initially included 167 patients, reduced to 152 (90.9%) after excluding 15 cases with fewer than 28 activations to ensure treatment uniformity. The final sample consisted of 105 patients without cleft palate (69.1%) and 47 with cleft palate (30.9%). Two types of expanders were used: Hyrax (n=109; 71.7%) and Haas (n=43; 28.3%). Among patients without cleft palate treated with Hyrax, anchorage was on primary teeth (40.0%) or permanent teeth (60.0%), while among those with cleft palate it was on primary (65.5%) or permanent teeth (34.5%). For Haas expanders, anchorage in non-syndromic patients was on primary teeth (44.0%) or permanent teeth (56.0%), and in syndromic patients on primary (61.1%) or permanent teeth (38.9%). Pain and functional discomfort (difficulty swallowing or speaking, increased salivation, nasal bleeding) were recorded daily using a structured questionnaire and the Wong-Baker scale. Analgesic use was also monitored. RESULTS: The Haas expander showed a more uniform tolerability profile between groups, with no statistically significant differences in mean overall pain (non-syndromic 0.94 ±0.75 vs syndromic 0.70 ±0.91; p=0.2037), and a rapid decrease within the first week. In contrast, the Hyrax expander showed significant differences: mean overall pain was higher in patients without cleft palate (1.38 ±0.64) compared to those with cleft palate (0.98 ±1.21; p=0.0003), with higher initial daily peaks (approximately 4.5 vs 2.6). Among patients without cleft palate, the Hyrax was associated with more frequent difficulty swallowing (51.25% vs 6.9%; odds ratio=14.22; p=0.0006). Nasal bleeding with Hyrax showed a nearly significant trend (p=0.052), occurring only in non-syndromic patients (12.5%) and absent in syndromic patients. With the Haas expander, nasal bleeding was sporadic, with no significant differences (p=0.064), observed only in non-syndromic patients (20%). Analysis of the anchorage site revealed that in patients without cleft palate, daily mean pain was significantly higher with anchorage on primary teeth compared to permanent teeth (p=0.0020). No significant differences emerged for anchorage on permanent teeth alone (p=0.6823). Overall analgesic use was limited but higher in non-syndromic patients (18.1%) compared to syndromic patients (8.5%). CONCLUSIONS: The results highlight the importance of personalized treatment planning in pediatric RPE. The Haas expander demonstrated more uniform tolerability, while the Hyrax showed significant differences in pain and discomfort in patients without cleft palate. Anchorage type affected pain only in non-syndromic patients with primary dentition. These findings emphasize the need to carefully consider the presence of cleft palate, the type of expander, and dental characteristics to optimize patient comfort and treatment adherence. Further studies with larger samples and more objective pain assessment tools are recommended.| File | Dimensione | Formato | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Espansione rapida del mascellare superiore in pazienti pediatrici con e senza palatoschisi studio osservazionale prospettico sul dolore percepito e disagi associati (1).pdf
Accesso riservato
Dimensione
2.09 MB
Formato
Adobe PDF
|
2.09 MB | Adobe PDF |
The text of this website © Università degli studi di Padova. Full Text are published under a non-exclusive license. Metadata are under a CC0 License
https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12608/93090