Facial soft tissue changes after nonsurgical rapid maxillary expansion: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Head & Face Medicine

Table 4 Results of the meta-analysis on changes in soft tissues after rapid maxillary expansion

Outcome	Studies	Subjects	Effect EstimateMD(Fixed, CI 95%)
A.Pre-expansion VS. postexpansion
Nasal width	5	208	0.84 [0.33, 1.34] ^a
Alar base width	4	188	0.71 [0.19, 1.23] ^a
Nasal tip prominence	3	56	0.59 [−0.26, 1.44]
Nasolabial angle	2	52	−0.06 [−4.36, 4.24]
Upper lip thickness	2	38	−0.01 [− 0.82, 0.79]
Basic upper lip thickness	2	38	0.28 [− 0.65, 1.22]
Soft pogonion thickness	2	38	0.01 [−0.79, 0.81]
upper lip to E line	3	72	0.11 [−0.65, 0.88]
Lower lip to E line	3	72	0.75 [0.51, 0.99] ^a
Height of nose	3	68	1.30 [−0.08, 2.67]
B.Pre-expansion VS. postretention
Nasal width	6	232	0.87 [0.34, 1.41] ^a
Alar base width	3	158	0.51 [−0.04, 1.06]
Mouth width	2	59	1.84 [0.66, 3.02] ^a
Upper philtrum width	2	45	0.74 [0.12, 1.36] ^a
Nasal tip prominence	4	78	0.26 [−0.99, 1.51]
Nasolabial angle	5	142	−0.88 [−2.96, 1.20]
upper lip to E line	2	52	−0.11 [− 0.33, 0.11]
Lower lip to E line	2	52	0.42 [0.17, 0.66] ^a
Upper lip height	3	87	−0.38 [−1.17, 0.41]
Lower lip height	2	59	0.48 [−0.47, 1.43]
Lower face height	2	59	0.42 [−1.17, 2.01]
C.Postexpansion VS. postretention
Nasal width	3	160	−0.13 [−0.70, 0.44]
Alar base width	2	140	−0.20 [− 0.80, 0.39]
Nasal tip prominence	2	38	0.19 [−1.25, 1.63]
upper lip to E line	2	52	−0.25 [−1.27, 0.77]
Lower lip to E line	2	52	−0.34 [− 0.57, − 0.11] ^a

A. Pre-expansion versus post-expansion; B. Pre-expansion versus postretention; C. Postexpansion versus postretention. ^asignificant

ISSN: 1746-160X