Efectos Clínicos de la expansión maxilar rápida y lenta en el paciente pediátrico.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the clinical effects of slow and rapid maxillary expansion in the pediatric patient and its impact throughout the therapeutic time. The differences between both techniques were contrasted, and the complications associated with each were identified to present a visual tool to facilitate clinical decision-making. METHODS: Descriptive and observational studies based on the review of 61 academic publications selected from PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar databases, clinical studies, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and experimental trials published between 2019 and 2025 were included. Specific inclusion criteria were used to ensure the relevance of the studies. RESULTS: Rapid Maxillary Expansion (EMR) effectively corrects transverse malocclusions quickly, but it presents complications such as dental inclination and the appearance of diastemas. Slow Maxillary Expansion (EML)showed fewer side effects and greater long-term stability, although it requires a longer treatment time. Both techniques presented common complications, such as pain and recurrence, which are adaptable with adequate follow-up. CONCLUSION: Slow Maxillary Expansion (EML) and Rapid Maxillary Expansion (EMR) are techniques used in pediatric patients and both generate positive clinical effects, which improve masticatory function, nasal breathing, better facial esthetics, and correct transverse maxillary development. EMR offers rapid short-term results, but with risks of complications, while Slow Maxillary Expansion (EML) offers more progressive and stable long-term results. Keywords: maxillary expansion, rapid maxillary expansion, slow maxillary expansion, malocclusion, periodontal complications