scholarly journals Comparison of external apical root resorption with clear aligners and pre-adjusted edgewise appliances in non-extraction cases: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vaibhav Gandhi ◽  
Shivam Mehta ◽  
Marissa Gauthier ◽  
Jijian Mu ◽  
Chia-Ling Kuo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Root Resorption ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Treatment Modalities ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Apical Root Resorption ◽  
External Apical Root Resorption ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Maxillary Incisors

Summary Objective The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the amount of external apical root resorption (EARR) observed during the orthodontic treatment with pre-adjusted edgewise appliance (PEA) or clear aligner therapy (CAT) and with 2D or 3D radiographic methods of measuring the root resorption. Search strategy and selection criteria A search of PubMed MEDLINE, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, LILACS, Web of Science, Dissertations & Theses Global, ClinicalTrials.gov registry, and the ISRCTN Registry was performed. Studies that have evaluated the amount of root resorption in non-extraction cases using CAT or PEA were selected for the systematic review. A meta-analysis was performed for the amount of root resorption of permanent maxillary incisors using PEA or CAT treatment modalities by either 2D or cone-beam computed tomography radiographic examination. Data collection and analysis Database research, elimination of duplicate studies, data extraction, and risk of bias were performed by authors independently and in duplication. A random-effect meta-analysis followed by subgroup comparisons were performed to evaluate EARR. Results A total of 16 studies (4 were prospective and 12 were retrospective) were identified for inclusion in the systematic review. The mean root resorption for the permanent maxillary incisors was in the range from 0.25 to 1.13 mm (overall: 0.49 mm; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.24 to 0.75 mm). The mean root resorption difference between CAT and PEA was statistically significant (P < 0.05) for 12 but not for 21, 11, or 22. Limitations One of the drawbacks is a lack of good quality prospective studies, specifically randomized clinical trials in the literature. Conclusions and implications Neither PEA or CAT technique leads to clinically significant root resorption (1 mm) of the maxillary incisors. The amount of EARR of maxillary incisors is not significant in comparing two treatment modalities (PEA and CAT), except for 12, where the PEA group has significantly more EARR when compared to CAT. Registration The protocol for this systematic review was based on the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions 5.1.0 and was registered at PROSPERO database (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42018113051). This systematic review is reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement.

scholarly journals Association between genetic polymorphisms and external apical root resorption: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2018 ◽  
Vol 48 (6) ◽  
pp. 395 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shifat A Nowrin ◽  
Saidi Jaafar ◽  
Norma Ab Rahman ◽  
Rehana Basri ◽  
Mohammad Khursheed Alam ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Genetic Polymorphisms ◽  
Root Resorption ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Apical Root Resorption ◽  
External Apical Root Resorption

scholarly journals Effectiveness of orthodontic temporary anchorage devices in canine retraction and anchorage preservation during the two-step technique: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Haonan Tian ◽  
Congman Xie ◽  
Min Lin ◽  
Hongmei Yang ◽  
Aishu Ren
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Canine Retraction ◽  
Temporary Anchorage Devices ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Mean Differences ◽  
Implant Anchorage

Abstract Background Temporary anchorage devices have been used for decades in orthodontic practice for many applications. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the effectiveness of orthodontic temporary anchorage devices in canine retraction during the two-step technique. Methods A search was systematically performed for articles published prior to June 30, 2019 in five electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, Scopus). The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and the risk of bias in nonrandomized studies of interventions (ROBINS-I) tool for controlled clinical trials (CCTs). The Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used for the quality assessment. Data concerning the mean difference in mesial molar movement and extent of canine retraction were extracted for statistical analysis. The mean differences and 95% confidence intervals were analyzed for continuous data. A meta-analysis with a random-effects model for comparable outcomes was carried out. Results Three RCTs and five CCTs were finally included. Meta-analysis showed a significant increase not only in anchorage preservation in the implant anchorage group in both the maxilla (1.56 mm, 95% CI: 1.14 to 1.98, P < 0.00001) and the mandible (1.62 mm, 95% CI: 1.24 to 2.01, P < 0.00001) but also in canine retraction in the implant anchorage group in both the maxilla (0.43 mm, 95% CI: 0.16 to 0.69, P = 0.001) and the mandible (0.26 mm, 95% CI: 0.02 to 0.49, P = 0.03). Conclusions There is very low-quality evidence showing that implant anchorage is more efficient than conventional anchorage during canine retraction. Additional high-quality studies are needed.

scholarly journals Effectiveness of orthodontic temporary anchorage devices in canine retraction and anchorage preservation during the two-step technique: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Haonan Tian ◽  
Congman Xie ◽  
Min Lin ◽  
Hongmei Yang ◽  
Aishu Ren
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Canine Retraction ◽  
Temporary Anchorage Devices ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Implant Anchorage

Abstract Background: Temporary anchorage devices have been used for decades in orthodontic practice for many applications. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the effectiveness of orthodontic temporary anchorage devices in canine retraction during the two-step technique. Methods: A search was systematically performed for articles published prior to June 30, 2019 in five electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science, Scopus). The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and the risk of bias in nonrandomized studies of interventions (ROBINS-I) tool for controlled clinical trials (CCTs) . The Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used for the quality assessment. Data concerning the mean difference in mesial molar movement and extent of canine retraction were extracted for statistical analysis. The mean difference s and 95% confidence intervals were analyzed for continuous data. A meta-analysis with a random-effects model for comparable outcomes was carried out. Results: Three RCTs and five CCTs were finally included. Meta-analysis showed a significant increase not only in anchorage preservation in the implant anchorage group in both the maxilla (1. 56 mm , 95% CI: 1.14 to 1.98, P <0.00001 ) and the mandible (1.62 mm , 95% CI: 1.24 to 2.01, P <0.00001 ) but also in canine retraction in the implant anchorage group in both the maxilla (0.43 mm , 95% CI: 0.16 to 0.69, P =0.001 ) and the mandible (0.26 mm , 95% CI: 0.02 to 0.49, P =0.03 ). Conclusions: There is very low-quality evidence showing that implant anchorage is more efficient than conventional anchorage during canine retraction. Additional high-quality studies are needed. Keywords: Orthodontic implants; Canine retraction; Systematic review; Meta-analysis

Effectiveness of text messaging interventions for the management of depression: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 25 (9) ◽  
pp. 513-523 ◽  
Author(s):  
Buddhika Senanayake ◽  
Sumudu I Wickramasinghe ◽  
Mark D Chatfield ◽  
Julie Hansen ◽  
Sisira Edirippulige ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Text Messaging ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Text Message ◽  
Behavioural Therapy ◽  
Clinical Depression ◽  
Treatment Modalities ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Services Delivery

Introduction Depression is a leading cause of human disability. Telemedicine-based interventions using text messaging are currently being trialled for the management of community-based clients with clinical depression. However, little is known about the effectiveness of such methods. Methods We searched the databases PubMed, Embase, Informit, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PsycINFO and Scopus for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published between January 2000 and April 2019. Studies comparing text messaging interventions to a comparator group for patients with depression were included in the review. Articles were assessed for quality using the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal checklist for RCTs. Results Nine RCTs (945 patients: 764 adults and 181 adolescents) were included in the systematic review. Five studies used text messaging as the only intervention, whilst the remaining combined text messaging with other treatment modalities such as behavioural activation or cognitive behavioural therapy. A meta-analysis was conducted on seven selected RCTs (845 patients: 664 adults and 181 adolescents). The standardised mean reduction in depression due to text messaging interventions was 0.23 (95% confidence interval: –0.02 to 0.48). There was evidence of heterogeneity in treatment effect between studies. Discussion There is marginal evidence supporting text messaging interventions as an effective treatment modality for people living with clinical depression. However, further research is needed to determine how best to utilise text-message interventions alongside other conventional forms of health services delivery.

scholarly journals Comparative study of root resorption of maxillary incisors in patients treated with lingual and buccal orthodontics

2017 ◽  
Vol 87 (6) ◽  
pp. 795-800 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carlos Eduardo Nassif ◽  
Andreia Cotrim-Ferreira ◽  
Ana Claudia Castro Ferreira Conti ◽  
Danilo Pinelli Valarelli ◽  
Mauricio de Almeida Cardoso ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Image Processing ◽  
Comparative Study ◽  
Root Resorption ◽  
Conventional Group ◽  
Anterior Crowding ◽  
Apical Root Resorption ◽  
Processing Program ◽  
External Apical Root Resorption ◽  
T1 And T2 ◽  
Maxillary Incisors

ABSTRACT Objective: To compare the magnitude of external apical root resorption (EARR) of maxillary incisors in patients with mild to moderate anterior crowding, treated with lingual and conventional (labial) orthodontics. Materials and Methods: The sample comprised 40 patients divided into two groups: lingual (20 patients) and conventional buccal brackets (20 patients). Patient ages ranged from 11 to 45 years, and the study included 12 men and 28 women. Apical root resorption was measured from periapical radiographs obtained at the beginning of treatment (T1) and at the end of the leveling phase (T2). Periapical radiographs were scanned and transferred to the CorelDraw X7 image-processing program, in which measurements of root lengths were performed. For intragroup and intergroup comparisons between the T1 and T2 phases, paired and independent t-tests, respectively, were used at 5% significance. Results: There was significant apical root resorption for all teeth evaluated; the magnitude of the EARR (T2−T1) ranged from −0.35 mm to −0.63 mm in the lingual group, and from −0.66 mm to −0.85 mm in the conventional group. Although there was an intergroup variation in the magnitude of EARR observed, no statistically significant differences were found. Neither group presented any teeth with resorption ≥1 mm. Conclusions: The magnitude of apical root resorption in maxillary incisors in patients with anterior crowding was similar regardless of orthodontic technique, lingual or conventional. Both techniques resulting in an apical rounding considered clinically insignificant.

scholarly journals Buteyko method for people with asthma: a protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (10) ◽  
pp. e049213
Author(s):  
Karla Morganna Pereira Pinto de Mendonça ◽  
Sean Collins ◽  
Tácito ZM Santos ◽  
Gabriela Chaves ◽  
Sarah Leite ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Secondary Data ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Plain Language ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
Meta Analyses

IntroductionButeyko method is recommended as a non-pharmacological treatment for people with asthma. Although the worldwide interest in the Buteyko method, there is a paucity of studies gathering evidence to support its use. Therefore, we aim to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the effects of the Buteyko method in children and adults with asthma.Methods and analysisWe will search on Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Embase, US National Institutes of Health Ongoing Trials Register ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform for studies focusing on the Buteyko method for children and adults with asthma. The searches will be carried out in September 2021 from database’s inception to the present. We will include randomised controlled trials comparing Buteyko method alone with asthma education or inactive control intervention. There will be no restriction on language. Primary outcomes include quality of life, asthma symptoms and adverse events/side effects. Two review authors will independently screen the studies for inclusion and extract data. We will assess the quality of the included studies using the ‘Risk of Bias’ tool. The certainty of the evidence will be assessed using the GRADE approach. Data synthesis will be conducted using Review Manager software. Reporting of the review will follow the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidance and the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions.Ethics and disseminationThis study will assess and provide evidence for the use of the Buteyko method in people with asthma. We will analyse secondary data and this does not require ethics approval. The findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals, at relevant conferences and will be shared in plain language in social media. Moreover, the findings of this review could guide the direction of healthcare practice and research.PROSPERO registration numberCRD42020193132.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document