Sarah Abu Arqub, Dalya Al-Moghrabi, Marissa G Iverson, Philippe Farha, Hala Abdullah Alsalman, Flavio Uribe
{"title":"各种上颌磨牙侵入疗法的疗效评估:系统回顾。","authors":"Sarah Abu Arqub, Dalya Al-Moghrabi, Marissa G Iverson, Philippe Farha, Hala Abdullah Alsalman, Flavio Uribe","doi":"10.1186/s40510-023-00490-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>To systematically assess the efficacy of the various interventions used to intrude maxillary molars. Furthermore, to evaluate associated root resorption, stability of intrusion, subsequent vertical movement of mandibular molars, cost effectiveness, compliance, patient reported outcomes and adverse events.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A pre-registered and comprehensive literature search of published and unpublished trials until March 22nd 2023 with no language restriction applied in PubMed/Medline, Embase, Scopus, DOSS, CENTRAL, CINAHL Plus with Full Text, Web of Science, Global Index Medicus, Dissertation and Theses Global, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Trip (PROSPERO: CRD42022310562). Randomized controlled trials involving a comparative assessment of treatment modalities used to intrude maxillary molars were included. Pre-piloted data extraction forms were used. The Cochrane Risk of Bias tool was used for risk of bias assessment, and The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system was used for certainty of evidence appraisal.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 3986 records were identified through the electronic data search, of which 24 reports were sought for retrieval. Of these, 7 trials were included. One trial was judged at high risk of bias, while the others had some concerns. Based on individual small sample studies, maxillary molar intrusion was achieved using temporary anchorage devices (TADs) and rapid molar intruder appliance (RMI). It was also observed to a lesser extent with the use of open bite bionator (OBB) and posterior bite blocks. The molar intruder appliance and the posterior bite blocks (spring-loaded or magnetic) also intruded the lower molars. Root resorption was reported in two studies involving TADs. None of the identified studies involved a comparison of conventional and TAD-based treatments for intrusion of molars. No studies reported outcomes concerning stability, cost-effectiveness, compliance and patient-reported outcomes. Insufficient homogeneity between the included trials precluded quantitative synthesis. The level of evidence was very low.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Maxillary molar intrusion can be attained with different appliances (removable and fixed) and with the use of temporary anchorage devices. Posterior bite blocks (spring-loaded or magnetic) and the RMI offer the additional advantage of intruding the mandibular molars. However, stability of the achieved maxillary molar intrusion long term is unclear. Further high-quality randomized controlled trials are needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":56071,"journal":{"name":"Progress in Orthodontics","volume":"24 1","pages":"37"},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10641061/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessment of the efficacy of various maxillary molar intrusion therapies: a systematic review.\",\"authors\":\"Sarah Abu Arqub, Dalya Al-Moghrabi, Marissa G Iverson, Philippe Farha, Hala Abdullah Alsalman, Flavio Uribe\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s40510-023-00490-3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>To systematically assess the efficacy of the various interventions used to intrude maxillary molars. Furthermore, to evaluate associated root resorption, stability of intrusion, subsequent vertical movement of mandibular molars, cost effectiveness, compliance, patient reported outcomes and adverse events.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A pre-registered and comprehensive literature search of published and unpublished trials until March 22nd 2023 with no language restriction applied in PubMed/Medline, Embase, Scopus, DOSS, CENTRAL, CINAHL Plus with Full Text, Web of Science, Global Index Medicus, Dissertation and Theses Global, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Trip (PROSPERO: CRD42022310562). Randomized controlled trials involving a comparative assessment of treatment modalities used to intrude maxillary molars were included. Pre-piloted data extraction forms were used. The Cochrane Risk of Bias tool was used for risk of bias assessment, and The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system was used for certainty of evidence appraisal.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 3986 records were identified through the electronic data search, of which 24 reports were sought for retrieval. Of these, 7 trials were included. One trial was judged at high risk of bias, while the others had some concerns. Based on individual small sample studies, maxillary molar intrusion was achieved using temporary anchorage devices (TADs) and rapid molar intruder appliance (RMI). It was also observed to a lesser extent with the use of open bite bionator (OBB) and posterior bite blocks. The molar intruder appliance and the posterior bite blocks (spring-loaded or magnetic) also intruded the lower molars. Root resorption was reported in two studies involving TADs. None of the identified studies involved a comparison of conventional and TAD-based treatments for intrusion of molars. No studies reported outcomes concerning stability, cost-effectiveness, compliance and patient-reported outcomes. Insufficient homogeneity between the included trials precluded quantitative synthesis. The level of evidence was very low.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Maxillary molar intrusion can be attained with different appliances (removable and fixed) and with the use of temporary anchorage devices. Posterior bite blocks (spring-loaded or magnetic) and the RMI offer the additional advantage of intruding the mandibular molars. However, stability of the achieved maxillary molar intrusion long term is unclear. Further high-quality randomized controlled trials are needed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":56071,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Progress in Orthodontics\",\"volume\":\"24 1\",\"pages\":\"37\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10641061/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Progress in Orthodontics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40510-023-00490-3\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Dentistry\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Progress in Orthodontics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40510-023-00490-3","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Dentistry","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的:系统评价上颌磨牙侵入的各种干预措施的效果。此外,为了评估相关的牙根吸收、侵入的稳定性、下颌磨牙随后的垂直运动、成本效益、依从性、患者报告的结果和不良事件。方法:在PubMed/Medline、Embase、Scopus、DOSS、CENTRAL、CINAHL Plus(全文)、Web of Science、Global Index Medicus、Dissertation and Theses Global、ClinicalTrials.gov和Trip (PROSPERO: CRD42022310562)中对2023年3月22日前已发表和未发表的试验进行预注册和全面的文献检索,无语言限制。包括随机对照试验,比较评估用于侵入上颌磨牙的治疗方式。使用了预先试点的数据提取表格。采用Cochrane偏倚风险评估工具进行偏倚风险评估,采用分级推荐评估、发展和评价(GRADE)系统进行证据确定性评估。结果:通过电子数据检索,共检索到3986份病历,其中检索报告24份。其中包括7项试验。一项试验被认为存在高风险偏倚,而其他试验则存在一些担忧。基于个体小样本研究,使用临时锚固装置(TADs)和快速磨牙侵入器(RMI)实现上颌磨牙侵入。使用开放咬合仿生器(OBB)和后咬合块也观察到较小程度的损伤。磨牙侵入器和后咬合块(弹簧加载或磁性)也侵入下磨牙。两项涉及TADs的研究报道了牙根吸收。没有一项已确定的研究涉及对磨牙侵入的传统治疗和基于tad的治疗的比较。没有研究报告稳定性、成本效益、依从性和患者报告的结果。纳入的试验之间的同质性不足妨碍了定量综合。证据水平非常低。结论:上颌磨牙可以通过不同的器械(可移动的和固定的)和使用临时支抗装置来实现。后咬合块(弹簧加载或磁性)和RMI提供了侵入下颌磨牙的额外优势。然而,上颌磨牙植入的长期稳定性尚不清楚。需要进一步的高质量随机对照试验。
Assessment of the efficacy of various maxillary molar intrusion therapies: a systematic review.
Aims: To systematically assess the efficacy of the various interventions used to intrude maxillary molars. Furthermore, to evaluate associated root resorption, stability of intrusion, subsequent vertical movement of mandibular molars, cost effectiveness, compliance, patient reported outcomes and adverse events.
Methods: A pre-registered and comprehensive literature search of published and unpublished trials until March 22nd 2023 with no language restriction applied in PubMed/Medline, Embase, Scopus, DOSS, CENTRAL, CINAHL Plus with Full Text, Web of Science, Global Index Medicus, Dissertation and Theses Global, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Trip (PROSPERO: CRD42022310562). Randomized controlled trials involving a comparative assessment of treatment modalities used to intrude maxillary molars were included. Pre-piloted data extraction forms were used. The Cochrane Risk of Bias tool was used for risk of bias assessment, and The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system was used for certainty of evidence appraisal.
Results: A total of 3986 records were identified through the electronic data search, of which 24 reports were sought for retrieval. Of these, 7 trials were included. One trial was judged at high risk of bias, while the others had some concerns. Based on individual small sample studies, maxillary molar intrusion was achieved using temporary anchorage devices (TADs) and rapid molar intruder appliance (RMI). It was also observed to a lesser extent with the use of open bite bionator (OBB) and posterior bite blocks. The molar intruder appliance and the posterior bite blocks (spring-loaded or magnetic) also intruded the lower molars. Root resorption was reported in two studies involving TADs. None of the identified studies involved a comparison of conventional and TAD-based treatments for intrusion of molars. No studies reported outcomes concerning stability, cost-effectiveness, compliance and patient-reported outcomes. Insufficient homogeneity between the included trials precluded quantitative synthesis. The level of evidence was very low.
Conclusions: Maxillary molar intrusion can be attained with different appliances (removable and fixed) and with the use of temporary anchorage devices. Posterior bite blocks (spring-loaded or magnetic) and the RMI offer the additional advantage of intruding the mandibular molars. However, stability of the achieved maxillary molar intrusion long term is unclear. Further high-quality randomized controlled trials are needed.
期刊介绍:
Progress in Orthodontics is a fully open access, international journal owned by the Italian Society of Orthodontics and published under the brand SpringerOpen. The Society is currently covering all publication costs so there are no article processing charges for authors.
It is a premier journal of international scope that fosters orthodontic research, including both basic research and development of innovative clinical techniques, with an emphasis on the following areas:
• Mechanisms to improve orthodontics
• Clinical studies and control animal studies
• Orthodontics and genetics, genomics
• Temporomandibular joint (TMJ) control clinical trials
• Efficacy of orthodontic appliances and animal models
• Systematic reviews and meta analyses
• Mechanisms to speed orthodontic treatment
Progress in Orthodontics will consider for publication only meritorious and original contributions. These may be:
• Original articles reporting the findings of clinical trials, clinically relevant basic scientific investigations, or novel therapeutic or diagnostic systems
• Review articles on current topics
• Articles on novel techniques and clinical tools
• Articles of contemporary interest