European journal of orthodontics最新文献

Background: Lateral cephalometric analysis (LCA) is the reference standard for identifying common skeletal relationships in orthodontics, such as Cl II and hyperdivergent skeletal discrepancies, but it entails radiation exposure. Therefore, photographic soft-tissue profile analysis (PSPA) could be a useful alternative for these diagnoses, particularly for paediatric patients. This study aims to estimate the accuracy of PSPA for determining common skeletal discrepancies in children.

Methods: Cephalometric radiographs and profile photographs of a consecutive series of 100 children (8.0-17.6 years old) made on the same day were included. The validity of PSPA was verified against comparable LCA. First, by assessing the Pearson correlation and then estimating the sensitivity, specificity, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves and area under the curve (AUC) in sample A (n = 50). After external validation in a new sample B (n = 50), the ROC-AUC, diagnostic odds ratio, best cut-off points and discriminative validity were assessed in the total sample. Interrater reliability was estimated using the intraclass correlation coefficient, the standard error of measurement and Bland-Altman plots.

Results: The measurement properties of the PSPA angles A'N'B', Gl'-Sn-Pog, N'-Sn-Pog', and N'-Tra-Me' were valid (ROC-AUC > 0.7) and reliable (ICCs > 0.92). The angles A'N'B', Gl'-Sn-Pog', and N'-Sn-Pog', with the respective cut-off points ≥7.7', ≥12.8', and ≤163.5', were accurate values for determining Cl II discrepancy. The N'-Tra-Me'-angle (≥63') was an accurate estimate for a hyperdivergent discrepancy.

Conclusions: These validated PSPA angles could be used in clinical settings as a minimally invasive diagnostic tool to screen children suspected of having skeletal Cl II and hyperdivergent discrepancies.

Background: Maxillary bonded and removable retainers maintain teeth in correct positions following orthodontic treatment. There is insufficient evidence regarding the capacity of the retention methods to stabilize the maxillary teeth both during and after retention.

Objective: To evaluate retention capacity and 1-year post-retention changes in the irregularity of maxillary anterior teeth and single anterior tooth contact point discrepancy (CPD) of two bonded and one removable retention method.

Trial design: Three-arm parallel group single-centre randomized controlled trial.

Methods: Ninety adolescent patients treated with fixed orthodontic appliances were enrolled. After gaining informed consent, the patients were randomized in blocks of 30 by an independent person into one of three groups: A) bonded retainer 13-23; B) bonded retainer 12-22; and C) removable vacuum-formed retainer. The primary outcomes were changes in Little's irregularity index (LII) and single CPD measured on digitalized casts before retention (T1), after 2 years of retention (T2), and 1-year post-retention (T3).

Blinding: The digital casts were blinded for the outcome assessor.

Results: Data on all 90 patients were analysed according to intention-to-treat principles. Changes in LII during retention were 0.3 mm in group A, 0.6 mm in group B, and 1.0 mm in group C. No significant differences between the groups were seen (P > 0.05). Changes during post-retention were 1.1 mm in group A, 0.5 mm in group B, and 0.4 mm in group C. Group A showed more significant changes than groups B and C (P = 0.003). During the whole post-treatment period, no significant differences were shown between the groups (P > 0.05). CPD did not differ significantly between the groups at any point.

Harms: Three patients showed changes of LII over 3 mm or CPD over 2 mm during the post-retention period, and two accepted to be realigned.

Limitations: The trial was a single-centre study evaluating 1-year post-retention changes.

Conclusions: The changes were clinically insignificant during and after the retention period. Thus, all three methods showed equal retention capacity.

Trial registration: www.clinicaltrials.com (NCT04616755).

Background: Orthognathic surgical procedures, whether in one or both jaws, can affect structures regarding the articulation and resonance of voice and speech.

Objective: Evaluating the impact of orthognathic surgery on voice and speech performance in individuals with skeletal dentofacial disharmony.

Search methods: Word combinations and truncations were adapted for the following electronic databases: EMBASE, PubMed/Medline, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Latin American and Caribbean Literature in Health Sciences (LILACS), and grey literature.

Selection criteria: The research included studies on nonsyndromic adults with skeletal dentofacial disharmony undergoing orthognathic surgery. These studies assessed patients before and after surgery or compared them with individuals with good facial harmony using voice and speech parameters through validated protocols.

Data collection and analysis: Two independent reviewers performed all stages of the review. The Joanna Briggs Institute tool was used to assess risk of bias in the cohort studies, and ROBINS-I was used for nonrandomized clinical trials. The authors also performed a meta-analysis of random effects.

Results: A total of 1163 articles were retrieved after the last search, of which 23 were read in full. Of these, four were excluded, totalling 19 articles for quantitative synthesis. When comparing the pre- and postoperative periods, both for fundamental frequency, formants, and jitter and shimmer perturbation measures, orthognathic surgery did not affect vowel production. According to the articles, the main articulatory errors associated with skeletal dentofacial disharmonies prior to surgery were distortions of fricative sounds, mainly/s/ and/z/.

Conclusions: Orthognathic surgery may have little or no impact on vocal characteristics during vowel production. However, due to the confounding factors involved, estimates are inconclusive. The most prevalent articulatory disorders in the preoperative period were distortion of the fricative phonemes/s/ and/z/. However, further studies must be carried out to ensure greater robustness to these findings.

Registration: PROSPERO (CRD42022291113).

Background and objectives: To-date, there is no evidence comparing the long-term efficacy of powered and manual toothbrushes in adolescents undergoing fixed appliance treatment. The trial compared the efficacy of manual versus powered toothbrush in controlling plaque and gingival health in patients undergoing fixed treatment in respect of both the short- and long-term.

Trial design: This was a randomized, parallel, controlled single-blind clinical trial, undertaken in a hospital setting, for which the consolidated standards of reporting trials guidelines were followed.

Methods: Ninety-two adolescent participants planned to undergo fixed appliance therapy, were randomly assigned to either a manual or powered toothbrush, with allocation concealment. The outcome measures were plaque and gingival indices and bleeding on probing, assessed at baseline (prior to fixed appliance), one-, six- and 12-months.

Results: The final sample included 84 participants, aged 12-18 (M=14.1, SD=1.93) years, with 40 (47%) were using a manual and 44 (52%) a powered toothbrush. The intervention (powered vs. manual toothbrush) itself appeared insignificant with regards to the gingival index (GI) (95%CI -0.1 - 0.03; P=0.26), plaque index (PI) (95%CI -0.13 - 0.14; P=0.93) and bleeding on probing (BoP) (95%CI -0.03 - 0.03; P=0.98) at any of the time points assessed. However, periodontal health indicators and plaque control significantly worsened (p<0.01), over the 12-month follow-up period, following placement of the fixed appliances placement.

Conclusion: Whilst no differences were found between manual and powered toothbrushes in controlling plaque and gingival health, in participants undergoing fixed orthodontic treatment, both were suboptimal and highlighted the need for greater patient support and monitoring.

Trial registration details: https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN74268923 Trial funding: Colgate-Palmolive (USA).

Background: The concept that posterior crossbite is not self-correcting has been controversial in the literature.

Objective: To evaluate the incidence of self-correction of crossbite in different stages of dentition in childhood.

Search methods and selection criteria: A bibliographic search using the acronym PECOS was performed in five databases and in partial grey literature. Studies evaluating children with posterior crossbite in the deciduous or mixed dentition at initial examination and followed for at least 3 years were included.

Data collection and analysis: The data extraction of the studies included presents information on authorship, clinical characteristics, main results, and conclusions. The risk of bias in the studies was evaluated through the Joanna Briggs Institute tool. The certainty of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE tool.

Results: Among the 3045 references identified, seven cohort studies met the eligibility criteria. The studies evaluated patients in transition from deciduous to mixed, mixed to permanent, and deciduous to mixed dentition. Two studies had a low risk of bias, three had a moderate risk, and two had a high risk of bias. The results showed posterior crossbite self-correction frequencies ranging from 12.2 to 77.1% during the transition from primary to mixed dentition, approximately 16% from mixed to permanent dentition, and a range from 20 to 82.8% from deciduous to permanent dentition. The level of certainty of the evidence generated ranged from very low to moderate.

Limitations: The observational design of the studies, without adequate control for confounding factors, and non-classification of the samples considering the types or the severity of the posterior crossbite.

Conclusion: The self-correction of posterior crossbite in childhood is possible. However, the results of this research do not allow to affirm how often the self-correction of posterior crossbite can occur. New studies that assess factors associated with the occurrence of self-correction of this malocclusion, including oral habits, may increase the certainty of the evidence.

Registration: PROSPERO CRD42022311935.

Objectives: To compare the long-term skeletal effects of tooth-borne (TB) and tooth-bone-borne (TBB) rapid maxillary expansion in growing children, using 3D imaging.

Materials and methods: In total, 52 consecutive patients who met the eligibility criteria were recruited and allocated to either the TB group, mean age 9.3 years (SD 1.3), or the TBB group, mean age 9.5 years (SD 1.2). Cone-beam computed tomography records and plaster models were taken before (T0), directly after (T1), 1 year after (T2), and 5 years after expansion (T3).

Randomization: Participants were randomly allocated in blocks of different sizes, using the concealed allocation principle in a 1:1 ratio. The randomization list was also stratified by sex to ensure homogeneity between groups.

Blinding: Due to clinical limitations, only the outcome assessors were blinded to the groups to which the patients were allocated.

Results: At T1, the midpalatal suture at its anterior part showed a statistically significant difference between the groups with a mean of 0.6 mm (CI 0.2-1.1) more expansion in the TBB group (P < 0.01). This difference was also more evident in boys at T1 with a mean of 0.8 mm (CI 0.2-1.4) (P < 0.01). These differences, however, blotted out at T2 and T3. The nasal width also showed similar differences between the groups, with a significantly larger expansion in the TBB group by a mean of 0.7 mm (CI 0.1-1.4) (P = 0.03). This group difference in favour of the TBB group was maintained at T2 (1.6 mm) and T3 (2.1 mm) (P < 0.01 T2 and T3, respectively).

Conclusions: Skeletal expansion in the midpalatal suture was significantly higher in the TBB group; however, the magnitude of this expansion was around 0.6 mm more and may not be clinically significant. Skeletal expansion at the level of the nasal cavity was significantly higher in the TBB group. There were no differences between boys and girls with regard to skeletal expansion.

Trial registration: This trial was not registered on any external sites.

Background/objectives: Patients with obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) frequently present with some form of upper airway anatomical impairment. Considerable research has been conducted on the role of the structures of the jaw and pharynx in the pathogenesis of OSA; however, the significance of the nose is somewhat unclear. Computed tomography is a widely used imaging modality for assessing the nasal cavity and paranasal sinuses, but only a small amount of the acquired data is used. Our aim was to ascertain whether the size of the cross-sectional areas of the nasal airway, measured from cone beam computed tomography (CBCT) images, is associated with OSA severity.

Materials/methods: A total of 58 patients with OSA, without any major paranasal sinus inflammatory pathology, were included in this register-based study. Patients had previously undergone ambulatory polysomnography and CBCT. The cross-sectional areas of the nasal cavity were measured in CBCT coronal sections. Statistical analyses were performed to determine any correlation between the cross-sectional area measurements and apnoea-hypopnoea index (AHI) or any significant difference in cross-sectional areas between AHI severity groups.

Results: No correlation was found between AHI and the smallest, total, or sum of the anterior cross-sectional areas of the nasal airway. Furthermore, there was no statistically significant difference in the cross-sectional areas between patients with the highest and lowest AHI.

Conclusions/implications: The small cross-sectional area of the anterior nasal cavity in patients without any major nasal pathology does not appear to be associated with OSA severity.

Background: There are a few hypotheses for the origin of palatally impacted canines (PIC). Nevertheless, the results of different studies are controversial.

Objective: Considering the evidence available in the literature to determine the skeletal and dentoalveolar dimensions in patients with PIC using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT).

Search methods: This systematic review adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Statement. The literature search with no publication date restriction in five databases and hand searching was performed until April 2023.

Data collection and analysis: Data assessing the skeletal and dentoalveolar characteristics of subjects with PIC evaluated with CBCT was extracted, and the studies' quality was evaluated with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Skeletal and dentoalveolar characteristics of subjects with PIC were compared with non-impacted subjects or non-impacted sides. MedCalc software was used to perform the meta-analysis. Statistical heterogeneity was assessed using the chi-square and I-square tests.

Results: The initial database search identified a total of 1153 studies. After applying the selection criteria, nine articles were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis. According to the NOS, all included articles were graded as "Good" quality. The meta-analysis showed a non-significant difference in measuring dentoalveolar height, alveolar first molar width, and basal lateral width. Controversial results were observed when evaluating both basal and alveolar first premolar widths. A significant difference was found when assessing anterior alveolar crest height and basal maxillary width.

Conclusions: Studies demonstrated the reduction of both dentoalveolar and skeletal maxillary parameters of the patients with PIC. The meta-analysis indicated that PIC correlates to both vertical and transverse skeletal dimensions of the maxilla. However, the results remain controversial. The findings should be interpreted with caution due to different study designs and unbalanced groups in the included studies; therefore, further research is needed for more reliable conclusions.

Registration: This systematic review and meta-analysis were registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO CRD42022362124).

Background: Assessment of unit of analysis (UoA) in meta-analysis with cluster, split-mouth, repeated measures designs, and multiple intervention groups is a fundamental step in the analysis. The objective of this study was to evaluate the UoAs in orthodontic meta-analysis and determine the error of the analysis.

Methods: An electronic search was conducted in the Cochrane Library and PubMed to identify orthodontic systematic reviews (SRs) with meta-analyses published in Cochrane and in the highest impact orthodontic journals between 1 January 2013 and 31 December 2022. SRs with meta-analysis assessing at least one of the following UoAs; cluster trials, crossover trials, multiple observations, or multiple intervention groups were included. Screening and data extraction were undertaken by two investigators independently. Descriptive statistics for the study characteristics were provided. The associations between avoiding the unit analysis error (yes, no) and the study characteristics were examined using Fisher's exact test and chi-square test. Logistic regression was undertaken for the significant predictors.

Results: Eighty SRs were deemed eligible for inclusion. Only 30 per cent of the included SRs avoided UoA errors. Compared to the split-mouth design, repeated measures designs had higher odds of avoiding UoA error (odds ratio: 9.6, 95% confidence interval: 2.8-32.3, P < 0.001). In contrast, fewer odds of avoiding the UoA error were found in the cluster design (OR: 0.2, 95% CI: 0.4-1.3, P = 0.09). Though multiple intervention groups have higher odds of avoiding UoA error than split-mouth studies, this was not statistically significant (OR: 2.1, 95% CI: 0.5-8, P = 0.28). None of the SRs characteristics have influenced the appropriate handling of the unit analysis except the type of the journal; the odds of avoiding the UoA error were higher in Cochrane reviews than the non-Cochrane reviews (OR: 3.3, 95% CI: 1.2-8.7, P = 0.02), and the number of authors (P < 0.05).

Conclusions: UoA errors are common in orthodontic meta-analyses and were only partially avoided in split-mouth design, repeated measures design, and multiple intervention groups.

Objective/design/setting: This retrospective study sought voluntary participation from leading cleft centres from Europe and Brazil regarding core outcome measures. The results of this study would inform the debate on core outcome consensus pertaining to the European Reference Network for rare diseases (ERN CRANIO) and achieve a core outcome set for cleft care providers worldwide.

Intervention/method: Five orofacial cleft (OFC) disciplines were identified, within which all of the International Consortium of Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) outcomes fall. One questionnaire was designed for each discipline and comprised 1. the relevant ICHOM's outcomes within that discipline, and 2. a series of questions targeted to clinicians. What core outcomes are currently measured and when, did these align with the ICHOM minimum, if not how did they differ, and would they recommend modified or additional outcomes?.

Results: For some disciplines participants agreed with the ICHOM minimums but urged for earlier and more frequent intervention. Some clinicians felt that some of the ICHOM standards were compatible but that different ages were preferred and for others the ICHOM standards were acceptable but developmental stages should be preferred to absolute time points.

Conclusion/implications: Core outcomes for OFC were supported in principle but there are differences between the ICHOM recommendations and the 2002 WHO global consensus. The latter are established in many centres with historical archives of OFC outcome data, and it was concluded that with some modifications ICHOM could be moulded into useful core outcomes data for inter-centre comparisons worldwide.