Long-term maxillary three dimensional changes following maxillary protraction with or without expansion: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Long-term
Maxillary expansion
Maxillary protraction
Meta-analysis
Journal
Journal of dental sciences
ISSN: 2213-8862
Titre abrégé: J Dent Sci
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 101293181
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jan 2021
Jan 2021
Historique:
received:
04
05
2020
revised:
11
06
2020
entrez:
1
1
2021
pubmed:
2
1
2021
medline:
2
1
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Maxillary protraction with or without expansion appears to be an effective orthopedic treatment in skeletal class III growing patients, but the long-term effect on maxilla changes is less clear. The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate long-term three dimensional skeletal effects on maxilla through face mask (FM) with or without rapid maxillary expansion (RME) in skeletal CIII growing patients. We searched database including PubMed, Science Direct, Embase and Web of Science through Feb 2020. Inclusion criteria were randomized controlled trials or cohort studies recruiting growing patients who received maxillary protraction and/or expansion and comparing the treatment groups with untreated controls. The follow-up periods were more than 3 years. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane tools (RoB2.0 and ROBINS-I). GRADE was used to qualify the evidence. This meta-analysis included 6 studies comprising 327 participants in total. No statistically significant changes were observed on the degree of Sella-Nasion-A point (SNA) in the treated groups when compared with the untreated controls. However, significant increase on maxillary rotation degree (mean difference: 8.20, 95% CI = 6.87-9.53, Our results indicated that FM and FM/RME treatments might not be long-term effective on correcting maxillary anteroposterior hypoplasia in growing patients. Additionally, more long-term studies are still necessary to further assess its skeletal benefits on maxilla in vertical and transverse dimension.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND/PURPOSE
OBJECTIVE
Maxillary protraction with or without expansion appears to be an effective orthopedic treatment in skeletal class III growing patients, but the long-term effect on maxilla changes is less clear. The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate long-term three dimensional skeletal effects on maxilla through face mask (FM) with or without rapid maxillary expansion (RME) in skeletal CIII growing patients.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
METHODS
We searched database including PubMed, Science Direct, Embase and Web of Science through Feb 2020. Inclusion criteria were randomized controlled trials or cohort studies recruiting growing patients who received maxillary protraction and/or expansion and comparing the treatment groups with untreated controls. The follow-up periods were more than 3 years. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane tools (RoB2.0 and ROBINS-I). GRADE was used to qualify the evidence.
RESULTS
RESULTS
This meta-analysis included 6 studies comprising 327 participants in total. No statistically significant changes were observed on the degree of Sella-Nasion-A point (SNA) in the treated groups when compared with the untreated controls. However, significant increase on maxillary rotation degree (mean difference: 8.20, 95% CI = 6.87-9.53,
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Our results indicated that FM and FM/RME treatments might not be long-term effective on correcting maxillary anteroposterior hypoplasia in growing patients. Additionally, more long-term studies are still necessary to further assess its skeletal benefits on maxilla in vertical and transverse dimension.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33384794
doi: 10.1016/j.jds.2020.06.016
pii: S1991-7902(20)30140-9
pmc: PMC7770293
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
168-177Informations de copyright
© 2020 Association for Dental Sciences of the Republic of China. Publishing services by Elsevier B.V.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have no conflicts of interest relevant to this article.
Références
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2011 May;139(5):636-49
pubmed: 21536207
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2016 Nov;150(5):751-762
pubmed: 27871701
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2014 Jan;145(1):41-54
pubmed: 24373654
Rev Stomatol Chir Maxillofac. 1972 Dec;73(8):633-42
pubmed: 4514929
J Orthod. 2018 Dec;45(4):250-259
pubmed: 30252620
J Orthod. 2010 Sep;37(3):149-61
pubmed: 20805344
J Oral Rehabil. 2016 Jul;43(7):543-64
pubmed: 27004835
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2002 Feb;121(2):129-35; quiz 193
pubmed: 11840125
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1998 Apr;113(4):453-62
pubmed: 9563362
J Orofac Orthop. 2015 Nov;76(6):520-30
pubmed: 26446505
Cleft Palate Craniofac J. 2005 Mar;42(2):121-7
pubmed: 15748102
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1999 Jun;115(6):675-85
pubmed: 10358251
Eur J Orthod. 1998 Jun;20(3):237-54
pubmed: 9699402
J Oral Rehabil. 2017 Jul;44(7):545-562
pubmed: 28214379
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1998 Mar;113(3):333-43
pubmed: 9517727
Stat Med. 2002 Jun 15;21(11):1539-58
pubmed: 12111919
Dental Press J Orthod. 2016 Nov-Dec;21(6):34-42
pubmed: 28125138
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2003 Mar;123(3):306-20
pubmed: 12637903
J Orthod. 2016 Sep;43(3):164-75
pubmed: 27564126
BMJ. 2016 Oct 12;355:i4919
pubmed: 27733354
Eur J Orthod. 2001 Oct;23(5):559-68
pubmed: 11668875
PLoS One. 2017 Mar 22;12(3):e0173875
pubmed: 28328995
BMJ. 2019 Aug 28;366:l4898
pubmed: 31462531
Orthod Craniofac Res. 2014 Aug;17(3):133-43
pubmed: 24725349
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2017 Jan;151(1):28-52
pubmed: 28024779
Angle Orthod. 1996;66(5):351-62
pubmed: 8893105
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2004 Jul;126(1):23-32
pubmed: 15224055
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2010 Nov;138(5):577-81
pubmed: 21055597
Zhonghua Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi. 2001 Nov;36(6):401-3
pubmed: 11930708
Orthod Craniofac Res. 2014 Nov;17(4):259-69
pubmed: 25041370
Eur J Orthod. 2010 Dec;32(6):706-15
pubmed: 20457582
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2011 Oct;140(4):493-500
pubmed: 21967936