Literature DB >> 33378419

A comparison of the effects of Forsus appliances with and without temporary anchorage devices for skeletal Class II malocclusion.

Lu Liu, Qi Zhan, Jing Zhou, Qianyun Kuang, Xinyu Yan, Xiaoqi Zhang, Yue Shan, Wenli Lai, Hu Long.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To compare the effects of Forsus appliances with and without temporary anchorage devices (TADs) for patients with skeletal Class II malocclusion.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Through a predefined search strategy, electronic searching was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, CENTRAL, ProQuest Dissertations & Theses, and SIGLE with no language restrictions. Eligible study selection, data extraction, and evaluation of risk of bias (Cochrane Collaboration tool) were conducted by two authors independently and in duplicate. Any disagreement was solved by discussion or judged by a third reviewer. Statistical pooling, sensitivity analysis, subgroup analysis, and assessment of small-study effects were conducted by using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis and Stata 12.0. Heterogeneity was analyzed for different types of study designs, TADs, and radiographic examinations.
RESULTS: Electronic search yielded a total of 256 studies after removing duplicates. Among them, six studies were finally included. All articles were of high quality. The pooled mean differences were -0.27 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.59, 0.05) for SNA, 0.58 (95% CI: -0.07, 1.23) for SNB, -0.86 (95% CI: -1.74, -0.03) for ANB, 1.63 (95% CI: 0.46, 2.80) for Co-Po, 0.75 (95% CI: 0.28, 1.23) for SN-MP, -7.56 (95% CI: -11.37, -3.76) for L1-MP, 0.47 (95% CI: -0.98, 1.91) for overjet, 0.39 (95% CI: -0.57, 1.35) for overbite, -1.84 (95% CI: -5.15, 1.47) for SN-OP, and 4.97 (95% CI: -1.22, 11.17) for nasolabial angle.
CONCLUSIONS: TADs (especially miniplates) were able to eliminate dental adverse effects of Forsus appliances for correction of skeletal Class II malocclusion.
© 2021 by The EH Angle Education and Research Foundation, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Class II malocclusion; Forsus; Meta-analysis; Systematic review; Temporary anchorage devices

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 33378419      PMCID: PMC8028478          DOI: 10.2319/051120-421.1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Angle Orthod        ISSN: 0003-3219            Impact factor:   2.079


  22 in total

1.  Applications of 3D imaging in orthodontics: part I.

Authors:  M Y Hajeer; D T Millett; A F Ayoub; J P Siebert
Journal:  J Orthod       Date:  2004-03

Review 2.  Mandibular changes produced by functional appliances in Class II malocclusion: a systematic review.

Authors:  Paola Cozza; Tiziano Baccetti; Lorenzo Franchi; Laura De Toffol; James A McNamara
Journal:  Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop       Date:  2006-05       Impact factor: 2.650

3.  Change of incisor inclination effects on points A and B.

Authors:  Rasha Al-Abdwani; David R Moles; Joseph Harold Noar
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2009-05       Impact factor: 2.079

4.  Class II malocclusion division 1: a new classification method by cephalometric analysis.

Authors:  L Perillo; G Padricelli; G Isola; F Femiano; P Chiodini; G Matarese
Journal:  Eur J Paediatr Dent       Date:  2012-09       Impact factor: 2.231

5.  GRADE guidelines: 5. Rating the quality of evidence--publication bias.

Authors:  Gordon H Guyatt; Andrew D Oxman; Victor Montori; Gunn Vist; Regina Kunz; Jan Brozek; Pablo Alonso-Coello; Ben Djulbegovic; David Atkins; Yngve Falck-Ytter; John W Williams; Joerg Meerpohl; Susan L Norris; Elie A Akl; Holger J Schünemann
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2011-07-30       Impact factor: 6.437

6.  Effects of miniplate anchored and conventional Forsus Fatigue Resistant Devices in the treatment of Class II malocclusion.

Authors:  Hakan Turkkahraman; Sule Kocabas Eliacik; Yavuz Findik
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2016-03-28       Impact factor: 2.079

7.  Three-dimensional effects of the mini-implant-anchored Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device: A randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Sherif A Elkordy; Amr M Abouelezz; Mona M Salah Fayed; Khaled H Attia; Ramy Abdul Rahman Ishaq; Yehya A Mostafa
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2015-05-19       Impact factor: 2.079

8.  Evaluation of the miniplate-anchored Forsus Fatigue Resistant Device in skeletal Class II growing subjects: A randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Sherif A Elkordy; Amr M Abouelezz; Mona M S Fayed; Mai H Aboulfotouh; Yehya A Mostafa
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2018-12-28       Impact factor: 2.079

9.  ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions.

Authors:  Jonathan Ac Sterne; Miguel A Hernán; Barnaby C Reeves; Jelena Savović; Nancy D Berkman; Meera Viswanathan; David Henry; Douglas G Altman; Mohammed T Ansari; Isabelle Boutron; James R Carpenter; An-Wen Chan; Rachel Churchill; Jonathan J Deeks; Asbjørn Hróbjartsson; Jamie Kirkham; Peter Jüni; Yoon K Loke; Theresa D Pigott; Craig R Ramsay; Deborah Regidor; Hannah R Rothstein; Lakhbir Sandhu; Pasqualina L Santaguida; Holger J Schünemann; Beverly Shea; Ian Shrier; Peter Tugwell; Lucy Turner; Jeffrey C Valentine; Hugh Waddington; Elizabeth Waters; George A Wells; Penny F Whiting; Julian Pt Higgins
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2016-10-12

10.  Dentoskeletal effects of the forsus™ fatigue resistance device in the treatment of class II malocclusion: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Amal I Linjawi; Mona A Abbassy
Journal:  J Orthod Sci       Date:  2018-02-15
View more
  1 in total

1.  Development of an Artificial Intelligence System for the Automatic Evaluation of Cervical Vertebral Maturation Status.

Authors:  Jing Zhou; Hong Zhou; Lingling Pu; Yanzi Gao; Ziwei Tang; Yi Yang; Meng You; Zheng Yang; Wenli Lai; Hu Long
Journal:  Diagnostics (Basel)       Date:  2021-11-25
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.