The aim of this systematic review is to compare the effect on the upper airways of orthopedic treatment for skeletal Class III malocclusion with untreated controls. Nine databases were searched up to August 2020 for randomized or nonrandomized clinical trials comparing orthopedic Class III treatment (facemask or chin-cup) to untreated Class III patients. After duplicate study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment (Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies-of Interventions [ROBINS-I]), random-effects meta-analyses of Mean Differences (MDs)/Standardized Mean Differences (SMD) and 95% Confidence Intervals (CIs) were performed, followed by the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation assessment evidence-quality. A total of 10 papers (9 unique nonrandomized studies) with 466 patients (42.7% male; average age 9.1 years) were finally included. Limited evidence indicated that compared to normal growth, maxillary protraction with facemask was associated with increases in total airway area (n = 1; MD = 222.9 mm2; 95% CI = 14.0–431.7 mm2), total nasopharyngeal area (n = 4; SMD = 1.6; 95% CI = 1.2–2.0), and individual airway dimensions (upper-airway MD = 2.5 mm; lower-airway MD = 2.1 mm; upper-pharynx MD = 1.6 mm; lower-pharynx MD = 1.0 mm; all n = 6). Subgroup/meta-regression analyses did not find any significant effect-modifiers, while the results were retained 2–5 years postretention. Our confidence in these estimates was, however, very low, due to the inclusion of nonrandomized studies with methodological issues. Limited data from 2 chin-cup studies indicated smaller benefits on airway dimensions. Existing evidence from controlled clinical studies on humans indicates that maxillary protraction for skeletal Class III treatment might be associated with increased airway dimensions, which are, however, mostly minor in magnitude.
S16: Efficacy of orthopedic treatment with protraction facemask on skeletal Class III malocclusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis