COMPARATIVE STUDY OF MINI SCREW ASSISTED RAPID PALATAL EXPANSION (MARPE) AND SURGICALLY ASSISTED RAPID PALATAL EXPANSION (SARPE) IN YOUNG ADULTS

Background: Palatal expansion is a common orthodontic treatment aimed at widening the maxilla, particularly for
individuals with maxillary constriction. Two popular methods for palatal expansion in young adults are MiniscrewAssisted Rapid Palatal Expansion (MARPE) and Surgically Assisted Rapid Palatal Expansion (SARPE). This study compares these two techniques in terms of their effectiveness, treatment duration, patient discomfort, and overall satisfaction.
Objective: The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the outcomes of MARPE and SARPE in young adults,
focusing on the amount of maxillary expansion, treatment duration, pain levels, post-treatment stability, and patient
satisfaction.
Materials and Methods: A total of 60 participants aged 18 to 30 years were randomly assigned to either the MARPE
group (30 participants) or the SARPE group (30 participants). Data were collected through pre-treatment and posttreatment cephalometric analysis, 3D Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT), patient-reported outcomes on
pain and discomfort, and overall patient satisfaction scores.
Results: The SARPE group achieved a slightly greater maxillary expansion (5.5 mm) compared to the MARPE group
(4.5 mm). However, the MARPE group had shorter treatment duration (9 weeks) compared to the SARPE group
(14.5 weeks). Patient-reported pain and discomfort were higher in the SARPE group, with significant differences
observed at all stages of treatment. Both groups showed minimal relapse and comparable post-treatment stability.
The MARPE group reported higher levels of patient satisfaction (8.2) compared to the SARPE group (6.5).
Conclusion: Both MARPE and SARPE are effective techniques for palatal expansion in young adults. While SARPE
allows for more significant expansion, it involves a longer treatment time and greater patient discomfort. MARPE,
being less invasive, offers a quicker recovery and higher patient satisfaction, though it provides slightly less
expansion. The choice of treatment method should depend on individual patient needs, severity of maxillary
constriction, and preference regarding treatment invasiveness.