Objective: Our work has as its main objective the evaluation of the occurrence of root resorptions through a systematic review of the literature. The secondary objective is to compare the classic RME and the MARPE, in order to guide our therapeutic choice towards an optimal risk-benefit ratio. Introduction: Rapid maxillary expansion (RME) with multi-dental, bone or mixed support is today the therapy of choice in the treatment of maxillary endognathism. In order to maximize the orthopedic effects and minimize the iatrogenic dental effects, in particular the risk of external root resorption, a paradigm shift in anchoring has appeared and the use of bone anchoring techniques in the therapy of rapid maxillary disjunctions seems to increasingly appeal to practitioners. This systematic review analyzed the current literature to study the phenomenon of root resorption after RME based on 3D computed tomography and compare these iatrogenic dental effects according to the technique used between conventional tooth-supported expansion and mini-screw-assisted rapid palatal expansion (MARPE) Materials and Methods: PubMed, Cochrane, Google Scholar and science direct were searched for systematic reviews, randomized or non-randomized controlled trials and cohort studies conducted in humans and published in the last 30 years (1994-2024). JBI was used for the risk of bias assessment of the included studies. Results: A total of 11 articles: 3 systematic reviews, 6 retrospective cohort studies and 2 randomized controlled trial. Conclusion: Our systematic review has proven the presence of root resorption and bone loss following rapid maxillary expansion with bone or tooth anchorage but we noted that the latter causes more significant damage to posterior teeth. In this regard, further studies testing different anchorage designs and using a consistent methodology for the assessment of root resorption are highly recommended.