Research
Yacout et al., 2021 — Frontiers in Dental Medicine
"Tooth-Bone-Borne vs. Bone-Borne Palatal Expanders: A Systematic Review"
The first systematic review directly comparing the two designs. Bone-borne-only expanders produced significantly less molar tipping than tooth-bone-borne designs, with comparable skeletal expansion.
Read Full Paper →Lin et al., 2015 — Angle Orthodontist
"Tooth-Borne vs Bone-Borne Rapid Maxillary Expanders in Late Adolescence"
Compared outcomes in late adolescents. Bone-borne expanders produced more skeletal and less dental expansion, with less buccal tipping — a frequently cited benchmark paper.
Search PubMed: PMID 25181600 →Ning et al., 2023 — American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
"Treatment Effects after Maxillary Expansion Using Tooth-Borne vs Tissue-Borne Miniscrew-Assisted Rapid Palatal Expansion Appliance"
Tooth-borne MARPE resulted in more buccal tipping, root resorption, and alveolar bone loss compared to tissue/bone-borne designs.
Read Abstract →Jiang et al., 2024 — Seminars in Orthodontics / ScienceDirect
"Critical issues concerning miniscrew-assisted rapid palatal expanders: A narrative review"
Confirms that pure bone-borne MARPE designs produce primarily skeletal expansion with minimal dental side effects, more parallel expansion in the coronal plane, and fewer periodontal complications than hybrid or tooth-borne designs.
Read Abstract →Winsauer et al., 2024 — Head & Face Medicine
"Adult maxillary expansion: CBCT evaluation — MASPE vs MARPE"
Pure bone-borne slow expansion achieved an 84% mid-palatal suture opening ratio vs 50% in the rapid tooth-assisted group, with significantly less pterygoid process deformation.
Read Full Paper →Inchingolo et al., 2023 — Children (MDPI)
"Comparison of Different Types of Palatal Expanders: Scoping Review"
Confirms skeletally anchored devices promote larger and more successful skeletal growth, particularly in adolescent patients, compared to dental anchorage designs.
Read Full Paper →