Nikolaos Gkantidis1, Ilias Mistakidis2, Thaleia Kouskoura3, Nikolaos Pandis3. 1. Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, University of Bern, Freiburgstrasse 7, CH-3010 Bern, Switzerland. Electronic address: nikosgant@yahoo.gr. 2. Department of Orthodontics, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Dentistry, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece. 3. Department of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, University of Bern, Freiburgstrasse 7, CH-3010 Bern, Switzerland.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To assess the available evidence on the effectiveness of accelerated orthodontic tooth movement through surgical and non-surgical approaches in orthodontic patients. METHODS: Randomized controlled trials and controlled clinical trials were identified through electronic and hand searches (last update: March 2014). Orthognathic surgery, distraction osteogenesis, and pharmacological approaches were excluded. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. RESULTS: Eighteen trials involving 354 participants were included for qualitative and quantitative synthesis. Eight trials reported on low-intensity laser, one on photobiomodulation, one on pulsed electromagnetic fields, seven on corticotomy, and one on interseptal bone reduction. Two studies on corticotomy and two on low-intensity laser, which had low or unclear risk of bias, were mathematically combined using the random effects model. Higher canine retraction rate was evident with corticotomy during the first month of therapy (WMD=0.73; 95% CI: 0.28, 1.19, p<0.01) and with low-intensity laser (WMD=0.42mm/month; 95% CI: 0.26, 0.57, p<0.001) in a period longer than 3 months. The quality of evidence supporting the interventions is moderate for laser therapy and low for corticotomy intervention. CONCLUSIONS: There is some evidence that low laser therapy and corticotomy are effective, whereas the evidence is weak for interseptal bone reduction and very weak for photobiomodulation and pulsed electromagnetic fields. Overall, the results should be interpreted with caution given the small number, quality, and heterogeneity of the included studies. Further research is required in this field with additional attention to application protocols, adverse effects, and cost-benefit analysis. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: From the qualitative and quantitative synthesis of the studies, it could be concluded that there is some evidence that low laser therapy and corticotomy are associated with accelerated orthodontic tooth movement, while further investigation is required before routine application.
OBJECTIVES: To assess the available evidence on the effectiveness of accelerated orthodontic tooth movement through surgical and non-surgical approaches in orthodontic patients. METHODS: Randomized controlled trials and controlled clinical trials were identified through electronic and hand searches (last update: March 2014). Orthognathic surgery, distraction osteogenesis, and pharmacological approaches were excluded. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. RESULTS: Eighteen trials involving 354 participants were included for qualitative and quantitative synthesis. Eight trials reported on low-intensity laser, one on photobiomodulation, one on pulsed electromagnetic fields, seven on corticotomy, and one on interseptal bone reduction. Two studies on corticotomy and two on low-intensity laser, which had low or unclear risk of bias, were mathematically combined using the random effects model. Higher canine retraction rate was evident with corticotomy during the first month of therapy (WMD=0.73; 95% CI: 0.28, 1.19, p<0.01) and with low-intensity laser (WMD=0.42mm/month; 95% CI: 0.26, 0.57, p<0.001) in a period longer than 3 months. The quality of evidence supporting the interventions is moderate for laser therapy and low for corticotomy intervention. CONCLUSIONS: There is some evidence that low laser therapy and corticotomy are effective, whereas the evidence is weak for interseptal bone reduction and very weak for photobiomodulation and pulsed electromagnetic fields. Overall, the results should be interpreted with caution given the small number, quality, and heterogeneity of the included studies. Further research is required in this field with additional attention to application protocols, adverse effects, and cost-benefit analysis. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: From the qualitative and quantitative synthesis of the studies, it could be concluded that there is some evidence that low laser therapy and corticotomy are associated with accelerated orthodontic tooth movement, while further investigation is required before routine application.
Authors: L Fernández-Ferrer; J-M Montiel-Company; E Candel-Martí; J-M Almerich-Silla; M Peñarrocha-Diago; C Bellot-Arcís Journal: Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal Date: 2016-11-01
Authors: Timothy Shaughnessy; Alpdogan Kantarci; Chung How Kau; Darya Skrenes; Sanjar Skrenes; Dennis Ma Journal: BMC Oral Health Date: 2016-01-13 Impact factor: 2.757