Dataset Information

Periodontal results of different therapeutic approaches (open vs. closed technique) and timing evaluation (< 2 year vs. > 2 year) of palatal impacted canines: a systematic review.

ABSTRACT:

Background

This review evaluates, as a primary outcome, which surgical technique (open vs. closed) and which type of material used for the auxiliaries (elastic vs. metallic) were preferable in terms of periodontal results during the treatment of palatal-impacted canines. The timing of the evaluation of the results was also assessed as a secondary outcome.

Methods

An electronic search of the literature up to March 2021 was performed on Pubmed, MEDLINE (via Pubmed), EMBASE (via Ovid), Cochrane Reviews and Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials (RCTs) (CENTRAL). The risk of bias evaluation was performed using version 2 of the Cochrane risk of bias tool (RoB 2) for RCTs and the ACROBAT NRSI tool of Cochrane for non-RCTs.

Results

11 articles met the inclusion criteria. Only one RCT was assessed as having a low risk of bias and all the non-RCTs were assessed as having a serious risk of bias. This review revealed better periodontal results for the closed technique and metallic auxiliaries. In addition, it revealed that the timing of the evaluation of the results affects the periodontal results with better results obtained 2 years after the end of treatment.

Conclusion

In the treatment of a palatal-impacted canine, the closed technique and metallic auxiliaries should be preferred in terms of better periodontal results. The timing of the evaluation of the results affects the periodontal results.

SUBMITTER: Guarnieri R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8579516 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Periodontal results of different therapeutic approaches (open vs. closed technique) and timing evaluation (< 2 year vs. > 2 year) of palatal impacted canines: a systematic review.

Guarnieri Rosanna R Bertoldo Serena S Cassetta Michele M Altieri Federica F Grenga Camilla C Vichi Maurizio M Di Giorgio Roberto R Barbato Ersilia E

BMC oral health 20211110 1

<h4>Background</h4>This review evaluates, as a primary outcome, which surgical technique (open vs. closed) and which type of material used for the auxiliaries (elastic vs. metallic) were preferable in terms of periodontal results during the treatment of palatal-impacted canines. The timing of the evaluation of the results was also assessed as a secondary outcome.<h4>Methods</h4>An electronic search of the literature up to March 2021 was performed on Pubmed, MEDLINE (via Pubmed), EMBASE (via Ovid ...[more]

PMID: 34758795

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThere are a few hypotheses for the origin of palatally impacted canines (PIC). Nevertheless, the results of different studies are controversial.ObjectiveConsidering the evidence available in the literature to determine the skeletal and dentoalveolar dimensions in patients with PIC using cone beam computed tomography (CBCT).Search methodsThis 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 analysisData 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.ResultsThe 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.ConclusionsStudies 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.RegistrationThis systematic review and meta-analysis were registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO CRD42022362124).

Project description:The objective of the current review was to evaluate the effectiveness of traditional and accelerated methods of palatally impacted canine's (PIC) traction in terms of treatment duration, velocity, periodontal, and patient-reported variables. An electronic search for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs) published between January 1990 and October 2021 was conducted in nine databases. Five major orthodontic journals were hand searched for additional studies. The participants were patients with unilateral or bilateral PICs who received conventional or accelerated orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances. Cochrane's risk of bias tool (RoB 2 tool) for RCTs and ROBINS-I tool for CCTs were used to assess the risk of bias. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) guidelines were used to assess the overall quality of the evidence. Nine articles (eight RCTs and one CCT) were included in this review (371 patients). There was no clarity in most studies about the possible effect of the mechanical traction method on treatment outcomes. The treatment duration decreased (about three to six months) when the open surgical method was used with traditional techniques and the traction velocity increased significantly (about 1-1.5 mm/month) when acceleration methods were used. No significant differences were found between the conventional intervention groups, as well as between the traditional and accelerated groups, in terms of most periodontal variables (p > 0.005). No significant differences were found in the pain levels associated with traditional PICs' traction when comparing different exposure methods in the short-term follow-up (1-10 days), while contradictory results were found in the pain incidence between these methods. The relationship between the pain/discomfort levels and the type of mechanical traction method was not evaluated. According to the GRADE, the quality of evidence supporting these findings ranged from low to very low. The combination of the open surgical technique with various designs of either superelastic wires or elastic traction means can lead to a reduction in the orthodontic treatment duration of PICs. The use of direct anchorage by miniscrews to move the PICs away from the adjacent teeth roots can lead to a reduction in root resorption and shorten the treatment duration. The evidence supporting these findings ranged from low to very low. The use of different types of mechanical means for conventional PICs' traction, with the use of open or closed traction techniques, does not lead to significant differences in periodontal outcomes between intervention groups. Contradictory results exist regarding the severity of the perceived pain in relation to the surgical exposure type, and the relationship between this variable and the mechanical traction method is still unclear. The use of accelerated methods for PICs' traction can lead to an increase in the velocity of traction movement with no significant differences in periodontal outcomes between accelerated and conventional methods. The evidence supporting these findings ranged from low to very low. More high-quality randomized CCTs are needed to establish good evidence in this field. The protocol of this systematic review was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO; CRD42021274476) during the first stages of this review.

Dataset Information

Periodontal results of different therapeutic approaches (open vs. closed technique) and timing evaluation (< 2 year vs. > 2 year) of palatal impacted canines: a systematic review.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Periodontal results of different therapeutic approaches (open vs. closed technique) and timing evaluation (< 2 year vs. > 2 year) of palatal impacted canines: a systematic review.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets