INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this meta-analysis was to quantify the amount of true incisor intrusion attained during orthodontic treatment. METHODS: Electronic databases (PubMed, Medline, Medline In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, all EBM reviews [Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, ASP Journal Club, DARE, and CCTR], Embase, Web of Science, and Lilacs) were searched with the help of a senior health sciences librarian. The goal was to identify clinical trials that assessed true incisor intrusion through cephalometric analysis and factored out craniofacial growth when required. From the selected abstracts, original articles were retrieved, and their references were hand searched for missing articles. RESULTS: Twenty-eight articles met the initial inclusion criteria, but 24 were rejected because they did not quantify true incisor intrusion or factor out normal growth impact when required. The remaining 4 articles showed that true incisor intrusion is attainable (0.26 to 1.88 mm for the maxillary incisors and -0.19 to 2.84 mm for the mandibular incisors) but with large variability depending on the appliance used. A meta-analysis with results from the 2 articles that used the segmental technique was completed. The combined mean estimates of intrusion and 95% CI were 1.46 mm (1.05-1.86 mm) for the maxillary incisors and 1.90 mm (1.22-2.57 mm) for the mandibular incisors. CONCLUSIONS: True incisor intrusion is achievable in both arches, but the clinical significance of the magnitude of true intrusion as the sole treatment option is questionable for patients with severe deepbite. In nongrowing patients, the segmented arch technique can produce 1.5 mm of incisor intrusion in the maxillary arch and 1.9 mm in the mandibular arch.
INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this meta-analysis was to quantify the amount of true incisor intrusion attained during orthodontic treatment. METHODS: Electronic databases (PubMed, Medline, Medline In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, all EBM reviews [Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, ASP Journal Club, DARE, and CCTR], Embase, Web of Science, and Lilacs) were searched with the help of a senior health sciences librarian. The goal was to identify clinical trials that assessed true incisor intrusion through cephalometric analysis and factored out craniofacial growth when required. From the selected abstracts, original articles were retrieved, and their references were hand searched for missing articles. RESULTS: Twenty-eight articles met the initial inclusion criteria, but 24 were rejected because they did not quantify true incisor intrusion or factor out normal growth impact when required. The remaining 4 articles showed that true incisor intrusion is attainable (0.26 to 1.88 mm for the maxillary incisors and -0.19 to 2.84 mm for the mandibular incisors) but with large variability depending on the appliance used. A meta-analysis with results from the 2 articles that used the segmental technique was completed. The combined mean estimates of intrusion and 95% CI were 1.46 mm (1.05-1.86 mm) for the maxillary incisors and 1.90 mm (1.22-2.57 mm) for the mandibular incisors. CONCLUSIONS: True incisor intrusion is achievable in both arches, but the clinical significance of the magnitude of true intrusion as the sole treatment option is questionable for patients with severe deepbite. In nongrowing patients, the segmented arch technique can produce 1.5 mm of incisor intrusion in the maxillary arch and 1.9 mm in the mandibular arch.
Authors: Greg J Huang; Steven B Bates; Ambre A Ehlert; Dean P Whiting; Stephanie S-H Chen; Anne-Marie Bollen Journal: J World Fed Orthod Date: 2012-09-01