Literature DB >> 29429068

Stability of maxillary protraction therapy in children with Class III malocclusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Yifan Lin1, Runzhi Guo1, Liyu Hou1, Zhen Fu1, Weiran Li2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the stability of treatment effects of maxillary protraction therapy in Class III children.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Multiple electronic databases were searched from 01/1996 to 10/2016. Randomized clinical trials, controlled clinical trials, and cohort studies with untreated Class III controls and a follow-up over 2 years were considered for inclusion. The methodological quality of the studies and publication bias were evaluated. Mean differences and 95% confidence intervals (CI) of six variables (SNA, SNB, ANB, mandibular plane angle, overjet, and lower incisor angle) were calculated.
RESULTS: Ten studies were included in the qualitative analysis, and four studies were included in the quantitative analysis. Compared with the control group, after treatment, the treated group showed significant changes: SNA +1.79° (95% CI: 1.23, 2.34), SNB -1.16° (95% CI -2.08, -0.24), ANB +2.92° (95% CI 2.40, 3.44), mandibular plane angle +1.41° (95% CI 0.63, 2.20), overjet +3.94 mm (95% CI 2.17, 5.71) and lower incisor angle -3.07° (95% CI -4.92, -1.22). During follow-up, the changes in five variables reflected significant relapse. Overall, the treated group showed significant changes only in ANB +1.66° (95% CI 0.97, 2.35) and overjet +2.41 mm (95% CI 1.60, 3.23).
CONCLUSIONS: Maxillary protraction can be a short-term effective therapy and might improve sagittal skeletal and dental relationships in the medium term. But some skeletal and dental variables showed significant relapse during the follow-up period. Long-term studies are still required to further evaluate its skeletal benefits. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The study evaluated the medium-term stability of skeletal and dental effects of maxillary protraction in Class III children and discussed whether the therapy can reduce the need for orthognathic surgery.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Class III children; Maxillary protraction therapy; Medium-term stability; Skeletal and dental changes; Systematic review and meta-analysis

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29429068     DOI: 10.1007/s00784-018-2363-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Oral Investig        ISSN: 1432-6981            Impact factor:   3.573


  39 in total

1.  Cephalometric changes after the correction of class III malocclusion with maxillary expansion/facemask therapy.

Authors:  K E Macdonald; A J Kapust; P K Turley
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  1999-07       Impact factor: 2.650

2.  Changes following the use of protraction headgear for early correction of Class III malocclusion.

Authors:  Y H Chong; J C Ive; J Artun
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  1996       Impact factor: 2.079

Review 3.  Effectiveness of maxillary protraction using facemask with or without maxillary expansion: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Moritz Foersch; Collin Jacobs; Susanne Wriedt; Marlene Hechtner; Heinrich Wehrbein
Journal:  Clin Oral Investig       Date:  2015-05-19       Impact factor: 3.573

4.  Three-dimensional assessment of maxillary changes associated with bone anchored maxillary protraction.

Authors:  Tung Nguyen; Lucia Cevidanes; Marie A Cornelis; Gavin Heymann; Leonardo K de Paula; Hugo De Clerck
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 2.650

5.  Long-term follow-up of early treatment with reverse headgear.

Authors:  Urban Hägg; Agnes Tse; Margareta Bendeus; A Bakr M Rabie
Journal:  Eur J Orthod       Date:  2003-02       Impact factor: 3.075

6.  Cephalometric variables predicting the long-term success or failure of combined rapid maxillary expansion and facial mask therapy.

Authors:  Tiziano Baccetti; Lorenzo Franchi; James A McNamara
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  2004-07       Impact factor: 2.650

7.  Maxillary protraction: treatment and posttreatment effects.

Authors:  R W Gallagher; F Miranda; P H Buschang
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  1998-06       Impact factor: 2.650

8.  Long-term effects of chincap therapy on skeletal profile in mandibular prognathism.

Authors:  J Sugawara; T Asano; N Endo; H Mitani
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  1990-08       Impact factor: 2.650

9.  Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement.

Authors:  David Moher; Alessandro Liberati; Jennifer Tetzlaff; Douglas G Altman
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2009-07-21       Impact factor: 11.069

10.  Early class III protraction facemask treatment reduces the need for orthognathic surgery: a multi-centre, two-arm parallel randomized, controlled trial.

Authors:  Nicky Mandall; Richard Cousley; Andrew DiBiase; Fiona Dyer; Simon Littlewood; Rye Mattick; Spencer J Nute; Barbara Doherty; Nadia Stivaros; Ross McDowall; Inderjit Shargill; Helen V Worthington
Journal:  J Orthod       Date:  2016-09
View more
  7 in total

1.  Maxillary protraction in patients with unilateral cleft lip and palate : Evaluation of soft and hard tissues using the Alt-RAMEC protocol.

Authors:  Ege Dogan; Ozlem Seckin
Journal:  J Orofac Orthop       Date:  2020-03-27       Impact factor: 1.938

Review 2.  Bone-anchored maxillary protraction (BAMP): A review.

Authors:  Apoorva Kamath; Shetty Suhani Sudhakar; Greeshma Kannan; Kripal Rai; Athul Sb
Journal:  J Orthod Sci       Date:  2022-05-04

3.  Effect of face mask therapy on mandibular rotation considering initial and final vertical growth pattern: A longitudinal study.

Authors:  Liseth Salazar; Melissa Piedrahita; Emery Álvarez; Adriana Santamaría; Ruben Manrique; Osmir Batista Oliveira Junior
Journal:  Clin Exp Dent Res       Date:  2019-06-13

4.  Effectiveness of Tongue Crib Combination Treating Severe Skeletal Angle Class III Malocclusion in Mixed Dentition.

Authors:  Wenting Zhao; Yan Chen; Hee-Moon Kyung; Jin-Shuai Xu
Journal:  Int J Clin Pediatr Dent       Date:  2020 Nov-Dec

5.  Clinical effectiveness of different types of bone-anchored maxillary protraction devices for skeletal Class III malocclusion: Systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Authors:  Jiangwei Wang; Yingying Yang; Yingxue Wang; Lu Zhang; Wei Ji; Zheng Hong; Linkun Zhang
Journal:  Korean J Orthod       Date:  2022-07-18       Impact factor: 1.361

6.  Sexual dimorphism in the long-term stability (10 years) of skeletal Class III treatment.

Authors:  Natalia Tejedor; Conchita Martín; José Antonio Alarcón; María Dolores Oteo-Calatayud; Juan Carlos Palma-Fernández
Journal:  Prog Orthod       Date:  2021-06-21       Impact factor: 2.750

7.  Long-term maxillary anteroposterior changes following maxillary protraction with or without expansion: A meta-analysis and meta-regression.

Authors:  Wei-Cheng Lee; Yi-Shing Shieh; Yu-Fang Liao; Cho-Hao Lee; Chiung Shing Huang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-02-22       Impact factor: 3.240

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.