评估正畸患者下颌切牙拔除后的结果和稳定性:系统回顾和荟萃分析。

Rasiga Gandhi, Poornima Jnaneshwar, Keerthi Venkatesan, Davis Devasahayam, Krishnaraj Rajaram, Rajia Mohamed Azharudeen, Kavichithraa Jothy
{"title":"评估正畸患者下颌切牙拔除后的结果和稳定性:系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Rasiga Gandhi,&nbsp;Poornima Jnaneshwar,&nbsp;Keerthi Venkatesan,&nbsp;Davis Devasahayam,&nbsp;Krishnaraj Rajaram,&nbsp;Rajia Mohamed Azharudeen,&nbsp;Kavichithraa Jothy","doi":"10.34172/joddd.2023.36989","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This study assessed the stability of the outcomes after mandibular incisor extraction (MIE) using intercanine width and peer assessment rating (PAR) scores in orthodontic patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>PubMed, Cochrane Library, Science Direct, Google Scholar, Ovid, and SciELO were systematically searched without restrictions until August 2022. A risk of bias assessment was performed using Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation tool was used to assess the quality of evidence. Random effects meta-analysis was performed using RevMan software.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Seven retrospective studies met the inclusion criteria and were included. Meta-analysis identified a statistically significant reduction in intercanine width with MIE after the retention period. The mean difference in post-retention changes concerning intercanine width (MD=0.14, 95% CI: -2.17-1.89; <i>P</i><0.00001) was significantly higher in premolar extraction (PE) compared to incisor extraction and significantly less in non-extraction compared to incisor extraction (MD=0.72, 95% CI: -0.59-2.03; <i>P</i><0.00001). Improvements in PAR scores from the start of treatment to the retention period indicated a high outcome standard (>70%) with MIE treatment, with no significant difference in the reduction percentage compared to premolar and non-extraction groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>With the existing retrospective studies of limited evidence, treatment outcomes with MIE were found to show good improvements in PAR scores. Some reduction in the intercanine width was evident after the retention period, which was observed even with the other two treatment modalities that were compared. Hence, with careful evaluation, MIE could be considered a valid treatment option.</p>","PeriodicalId":15599,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Dental Research, Dental Clinics, Dental Prospects","volume":"17 2","pages":"71-80"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10462469/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessment of the outcomes and stability after mandibular incisor extraction in orthodontic patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Rasiga Gandhi,&nbsp;Poornima Jnaneshwar,&nbsp;Keerthi Venkatesan,&nbsp;Davis Devasahayam,&nbsp;Krishnaraj Rajaram,&nbsp;Rajia Mohamed Azharudeen,&nbsp;Kavichithraa Jothy\",\"doi\":\"10.34172/joddd.2023.36989\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>This study assessed the stability of the outcomes after mandibular incisor extraction (MIE) using intercanine width and peer assessment rating (PAR) scores in orthodontic patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>PubMed, Cochrane Library, Science Direct, Google Scholar, Ovid, and SciELO were systematically searched without restrictions until August 2022. A risk of bias assessment was performed using Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation tool was used to assess the quality of evidence. Random effects meta-analysis was performed using RevMan software.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Seven retrospective studies met the inclusion criteria and were included. Meta-analysis identified a statistically significant reduction in intercanine width with MIE after the retention period. The mean difference in post-retention changes concerning intercanine width (MD=0.14, 95% CI: -2.17-1.89; <i>P</i><0.00001) was significantly higher in premolar extraction (PE) compared to incisor extraction and significantly less in non-extraction compared to incisor extraction (MD=0.72, 95% CI: -0.59-2.03; <i>P</i><0.00001). Improvements in PAR scores from the start of treatment to the retention period indicated a high outcome standard (>70%) with MIE treatment, with no significant difference in the reduction percentage compared to premolar and non-extraction groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>With the existing retrospective studies of limited evidence, treatment outcomes with MIE were found to show good improvements in PAR scores. Some reduction in the intercanine width was evident after the retention period, which was observed even with the other two treatment modalities that were compared. Hence, with careful evaluation, MIE could be considered a valid treatment option.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15599,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Dental Research, Dental Clinics, Dental Prospects\",\"volume\":\"17 2\",\"pages\":\"71-80\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10462469/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Dental Research, Dental Clinics, Dental Prospects\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.34172/joddd.2023.36989\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Dentistry\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Dental Research, Dental Clinics, Dental Prospects","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.34172/joddd.2023.36989","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Dentistry","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:本研究采用齿间宽度和同伴评价评分(PAR)评价正畸患者下颌切牙拔牙(MIE)后结果的稳定性。方法:系统检索PubMed、Cochrane Library、Science Direct、Google Scholar、Ovid、SciELO,检索截止至2022年8月。采用纽卡斯尔-渥太华量表(NOS)进行偏倚风险评估。采用推荐、评估、发展和评价分级工具来评估证据的质量。随机效应meta分析采用RevMan软件。结果:7项回顾性研究符合纳入标准并被纳入。荟萃分析发现,在保留期后,使用MIE的犬间宽度有统计学意义上的显著减少。保留后犬齿间宽度变化的平均差异(MD=0.14, 95% CI: -2.17-1.89;与前磨牙组和未拔牙组相比,MIE组的还原率无显著差异。结论:在现有证据有限的回顾性研究中,发现MIE治疗结果显示PAR评分有良好的改善。在保留期后,犬间宽度明显减小,甚至在比较其他两种治疗方式时也观察到这一点。因此,经过仔细评估,MIE可以被认为是一种有效的治疗选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Assessment of the outcomes and stability after mandibular incisor extraction in orthodontic patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: This study assessed the stability of the outcomes after mandibular incisor extraction (MIE) using intercanine width and peer assessment rating (PAR) scores in orthodontic patients.

Methods: PubMed, Cochrane Library, Science Direct, Google Scholar, Ovid, and SciELO were systematically searched without restrictions until August 2022. A risk of bias assessment was performed using Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation tool was used to assess the quality of evidence. Random effects meta-analysis was performed using RevMan software.

Results: Seven retrospective studies met the inclusion criteria and were included. Meta-analysis identified a statistically significant reduction in intercanine width with MIE after the retention period. The mean difference in post-retention changes concerning intercanine width (MD=0.14, 95% CI: -2.17-1.89; P<0.00001) was significantly higher in premolar extraction (PE) compared to incisor extraction and significantly less in non-extraction compared to incisor extraction (MD=0.72, 95% CI: -0.59-2.03; P<0.00001). Improvements in PAR scores from the start of treatment to the retention period indicated a high outcome standard (>70%) with MIE treatment, with no significant difference in the reduction percentage compared to premolar and non-extraction groups.

Conclusion: With the existing retrospective studies of limited evidence, treatment outcomes with MIE were found to show good improvements in PAR scores. Some reduction in the intercanine width was evident after the retention period, which was observed even with the other two treatment modalities that were compared. Hence, with careful evaluation, MIE could be considered a valid treatment option.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
23
审稿时长
25 weeks
期刊介绍: Journal of Dental Research Dental Clinics Dental Prospects (JODDD) is a Platinum* Open Access, peer-reviewed quarterly indexed journal that publishes articles of basic, clinical, and prospective nature in all areas of dentistry and oral health.
期刊最新文献
Effect of treatment variables on apical extrusion of debris during root canal retreatment: A systematic review and meta-analysis of laboratory studies. Effects of ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid, citric acid, and etidronic acid on root dentin mineral content and bond strength of a bioceramic-based sealer: A scanning electron microscopy-energy dispersive spectroscopy study. Evaluation of the accuracy of full-arch impressions between three different intraoral scanners and conventional impressions: A prospective in vivo study. Evaluation of the skeletal and dental effects of a hybrid aesthetic functional appliance (HAF) in skeletal class II division 1 malocclusion: A prospective uncontrolled clinical trial. Impact of dental caries on the daily lives of geriatric patients visiting dental hospitals in Rawalpindi, Pakistan.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1