-
Australian Dental Journal Mar 2017Since the introduction of the Tooth Positioner (TP Orthodontics) in 1944, removable appliances analogous to clear aligners have been employed for mild to moderate... (Review)
Review
Since the introduction of the Tooth Positioner (TP Orthodontics) in 1944, removable appliances analogous to clear aligners have been employed for mild to moderate orthodontic tooth movements. Clear aligner therapy has been a part of orthodontic practice for decades, but has, particularly since the introduction of Invisalign appliances (Align Technology) in 1998, become an increasingly common addition to the orthodontic armamentarium. An internet search reveals at least 27 different clear aligner products currently on offer for orthodontic treatment. The present paper will highlight the increasing popularity of clear aligner appliances, as well as the clinical scope and the limitations of aligner therapy in general. Further, the paper will outline the differences between the various types of clear aligner products currently available.
Topics: Humans; Malocclusion; Orthodontic Appliance Design; Orthodontic Appliances, Removable
PubMed: 28297094
DOI: 10.1111/adj.12480 -
Dental Update 2016Extra-oral appliances are used in orthodontics to apply forces to the jaws, dentition or both and the popularity of these appliances is cyclical. Although the use of... (Review)
Review
Extra-oral appliances are used in orthodontics to apply forces to the jaws, dentition or both and the popularity of these appliances is cyclical. Although the use of retraction headgear for the management of Class II malocclusion has declined over the last 20 years with the refinement of non-compliance approaches, including temporary anchorage devices, headgear still has a useful role in orthodontics. The use of protraction headgear has increased as more evidence of its effectiveness for the treatment of Class lIl malocclusion has become available. This paper describes the mechanics and contemporary uses of headgear in orthodontics for primary care dentists and specialist orthodontists. CPD/CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Extra-oral appliances have specific uses in orthodontic biomechanics. Clinicians using retraction headgear and protraction headgear should be familiar with their clinical indications, the potential problems and how these can be avoided.
Topics: Biomechanical Phenomena; Extraoral Traction Appliances; Humans; Orthodontic Anchorage Procedures; Orthodontic Appliance Design; Stress, Mechanical; Tooth Movement Techniques
PubMed: 27024904
DOI: 10.12968/denu.2016.43.1.74 -
The Angle Orthodontist Sep 2015To assess the scientific evidence related to the efficacy of clear aligner treatment (CAT) in controlling orthodontic tooth movement. (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
To assess the scientific evidence related to the efficacy of clear aligner treatment (CAT) in controlling orthodontic tooth movement.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
PubMed, PMC, NLM, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Clinical Trials, Web of Knowledge, Scopus, Google Scholar, and LILACs were searched from January 2000 to June 2014 to identify all peer-reviewed articles potentially relevant to the review. Methodological shortcomings were highlighted and the quality of the studies was ranked using the Cochrane Tool for Risk of Bias Assessment.
RESULTS
Eleven relevant articles were selected (two Randomized Clinical Trials (RCT), five prospective non-randomized, four retrospective non-randomized), and the risk of bias was moderate for six studies and unclear for the others. The amount of mean intrusion reported was 0.72 mm. Extrusion was the most difficult movement to control (30% of accuracy), followed by rotation. Upper molar distalization revealed the highest predictability (88%) when a bodily movement of at least 1.5 mm was prescribed. A decrease of the Little's Index (mandibular arch: 5 mm; maxillary arch: 4 mm) was observed in aligning arches.
CONCLUSIONS
CAT aligns and levels the arches; it is effective in controlling anterior intrusion but not anterior extrusion; it is effective in controlling posterior buccolingual inclination but not anterior buccolingual inclination; it is effective in controlling upper molar bodily movements of about 1.5 mm; and it is not effective in controlling rotation of rounded teeth in particular. However, the results of this review should be interpreted with caution because of the number, quality, and heterogeneity of the studies.
Topics: Humans; Malocclusion; Orthodontic Appliance Design; Prospective Studies; Retrospective Studies; Tooth Movement Techniques
PubMed: 25412265
DOI: 10.2319/061614-436.1 -
Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics 2017In dental practice, low-level laser therapy (LLLT) and high-intensity laser therapy (HILT) are mainly used for dental surgery and biostimulation therapy. Within the... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
In dental practice, low-level laser therapy (LLLT) and high-intensity laser therapy (HILT) are mainly used for dental surgery and biostimulation therapy. Within the Orthodontic specialty, while LLLT has been widely used to treat pain associated with orthodontic movement, accelerate bone regeneration after rapid maxillary expansion, and enhance orthodontic tooth movement, HILT, in turn, has been seen as an alternative for addressing soft tissue complications associated to orthodontic treatment.
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this study is to discuss HILT applications in orthodontic treatment.
METHODS
This study describes the use of HILT in surgical treatments such as gingivectomy, ulotomy, ulectomy, fiberotomy, labial and lingual frenectomies, as well as hard tissue and other dental restorative materials applications.
CONCLUSION
Despite the many applications for lasers in Orthodontics, they are still underused by Brazilian practitioners. However, it is quite likely that this demand will increase over the next years - following the trend in the USA, where laser therapies are more widely used.
Topics: Animals; Gingivectomy; Humans; Laser Therapy; Lasers, Semiconductor; Low-Level Light Therapy; Orthodontics; Surgery, Oral; Tooth Movement Techniques
PubMed: 29364385
DOI: 10.1590/2177-6709.22.6.099-109.sar -
Australian Dental Journal Mar 2017Maintaining teeth in their corrected positions following orthodontic treatment can be extremely challenging. Teeth have a tendency to move back towards the original... (Review)
Review
Maintaining teeth in their corrected positions following orthodontic treatment can be extremely challenging. Teeth have a tendency to move back towards the original malocclusion as a result of periodontal, gingival, occlusal and growth related factors. However, tooth movement can also occur as a result of normal age changes. Because orthodontics is unable to predict which patients are at risk of relapse, those which will remain stable and the extent of relapse that will occur in the long-term, clinicians need to treat all patients as if they have a high potential to relapse. To reduce this risk, long term retention is advocated. This can be a significant commitment for patients, and so retention and the potential for relapse must form a key part of the informed consent process prior to orthodontic treatment. It is vital that patients are made fully aware of their responsibilities in committing to wear retainers as prescribed in order to reduce the chance of relapse. If patients are unable or unwilling to comply as prescribed, they must be prepared to accept that there will be tooth positional changes following treatment. There is currently insufficient high quality evidence regarding the best type of retention or retention regimen, and so each clinician's approach will be affected by their personal, clinical experience and expertise, and guided by their patients' expectations and circumstances.
Topics: Humans; Malocclusion; Orthodontic Retainers; Orthodontics, Corrective; Recurrence
PubMed: 28297088
DOI: 10.1111/adj.12475 -
Progress in Orthodontics Dec 2016The treatment options for the early treatment of anterior open bite are still controversial. The aim of this study was to evaluate the actual available evidence on... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
The treatment options for the early treatment of anterior open bite are still controversial. The aim of this study was to evaluate the actual available evidence on treatments of anterior open bite in the mixed dentition in order to assess the effectiveness of the early treatment in reducing open bite, the most efficacious treatment strategy and the stability of the results.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
A literature survey was done on November 15, 2015, by means of appropriate Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) using the following databases: PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, LILACS, VHL, and WEB OF SCIENCE. Randomized clinical trials and studies with a control group (treated or untreated) were then selected by two authors. Trials including patients with syndromes or in the permanent dentition and studies concerning treatment with extractions, full-fixed appliances, or surgery were not considered. Full articles were retrieved for abstracts or titles that met the initial inclusion criteria or lacked sufficient detail for immediate exclusion.
RESULTS
Two thousand five hundred sixty-nine studies about open bite were available; the search strategy selected 240 of them. Twenty-four articles have been judged suitably for the final review, and their relevant data were analyzed.
DISCUSSION
Although this review confirms the effectiveness of early treatment of open bite, particularly when no-compliance strategies are employed, meta-analysis was unfeasible due to lack of standardization, important methodological limitations, and shortcomings of the studies.
CONCLUSIONS
A more robust approach to trial design in terms of methodology and error analysis is needed. Besides, more studies with longer periods of follow-up are required.
Topics: Dentition, Mixed; Dentition, Permanent; Humans; Malocclusion; Meta-Analysis as Topic; Open Bite; Orthodontic Appliances; Orthodontic Appliances, Functional; Orthodontic Appliances, Removable; Orthodontics, Corrective; Orthopedic Procedures; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 27615261
DOI: 10.1186/s40510-016-0142-0 -
Australian Dental Journal Mar 2017The treatment of children presenting with a Class II division I malocclusion involves one of two approaches. The first provides treatment in two phases; one of... (Review)
Review
The treatment of children presenting with a Class II division I malocclusion involves one of two approaches. The first provides treatment in two phases; one of intervention during the mixed dentition (phase I) followed by a second definitive course of appliance treatment in early adolescence (phase II). The second approach involves providing a single course of comprehensive therapy during adolescence. The debate for and against early treatment is discussed alongside key, clinically relevant evidence related to Class II division I malocclusions.
Topics: Adolescent; Age Factors; Child; Dentition, Mixed; Female; Humans; Male; Malocclusion, Angle Class II; Orthodontic Appliances, Functional; Orthodontics, Interceptive
PubMed: 28297093
DOI: 10.1111/adj.12478 -
Progress in Orthodontics Sep 2018Aim was to systematically search the literature and assess the available evidence regarding the clinical effectiveness of the Invisalign® system.
BACKGROUND
Aim was to systematically search the literature and assess the available evidence regarding the clinical effectiveness of the Invisalign® system.
METHODS
Electronic database searches of published and unpublished literature were performed. The reference lists of all eligible articles were examined for additional studies. Reporting of this review was based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines.
RESULTS
Three RCTs, 8 prospective, and 11 retrospective studies were included. In general, the level of evidence was moderate and the risk of bias ranged from low to high, given the low risk of bias in included RCTs and the moderate (n = 13) or high (n = 6) risk of the other studies. The lack of standardized protocols and the high amount of clinical and methodological heterogeneity across the studies precluded a valid interpretation of the actual results through pooled estimates. However, there was substantial consistency among studies that the Invisalign® system is a viable alternative to conventional orthodontic therapy in the correction of mild to moderate malocclusions in non-growing patients that do not require extraction. Moreover, Invisalign® aligners can predictably level, tip, and derotate teeth (except for cuspids and premolars). On the other hand, limited efficacy was identified in arch expansion through bodily tooth movement, extraction space closure, corrections of occlusal contacts, and larger antero-posterior and vertical discrepancies.
CONCLUSIONS
Although this review included a considerable number of studies, no clear clinical recommendations can be made, based on solid scientific evidence, apart from non-extraction treatment of mild to moderate malocclusions in non-growing patients. Results should be interpreted with caution due to the high heterogeneity.
Topics: Humans; Malocclusion; Orthodontic Appliances, Removable; Tooth Movement Techniques; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 30264270
DOI: 10.1186/s40510-018-0235-z -
Dental Press Journal of Orthodontics 2019Orthodontic traction of impacted canines stands as a major challenge for Orthodontics. It is a relatively frequent clinical complaint which management, more often than...
Orthodontic traction of impacted canines stands as a major challenge for Orthodontics. It is a relatively frequent clinical complaint which management, more often than not, requires a multidisciplinary approach. Surgical exposure of the impacted canine, and the complex orthodontic mechanics applied to align the tooth back into the arch, may frequently lead to complications involving supporting tissues, not to mention the long treatment time and high costs imposed to patients. In face of that, it is worth highlighting the relevance of early diagnosis as to intervene efficiently and as soon as possible. This paper presents a review of the main concepts involving prevalence, etiology and classification of impacted canines, and describes the different clinical management options that would help solve the problem. It illustrates the topic by presenting a treatment delivered to a 13 year 7 months old male patient, suffering from a Class II, division 2, left subdivision, malocclusion, associated to a deep bite and a prolonged retention of a primary upper canine caused by the impaction of the permanent tooth. Corrective orthodontic therapy was associated to a rapid maxillary expansion and to the use of a high pull headgear. Impacted canine was submitted to orthodontic traction and correctly positioned back into the arch. This approach proved to be efficient in meeting both functional and aesthetic goals.
Topics: Adolescent; Cuspid; Dentition, Permanent; Esthetics, Dental; Humans; Malocclusion; Orthodontic Extrusion; Tooth Movement Techniques; Tooth, Impacted
PubMed: 30916252
DOI: 10.1590/2177-6709.24.1.074-087.bbo -
Progress in Orthodontics Dec 2016In the view of the widespread acceptance of indefinite retention, it is important to determine the effects of fixed and removable orthodontic retainers on periodontal... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
In the view of the widespread acceptance of indefinite retention, it is important to determine the effects of fixed and removable orthodontic retainers on periodontal health, survival and failure rates of retainers, cost-effectiveness, and impact of orthodontic retainers on patient-reported outcomes.
METHODS
A comprehensive literature search was undertaken based on a defined electronic and gray literature search strategy (
PROSPERO
CRD42015029169). The following databases were searched (up to October 2015); MEDLINE via OVID, PubMed, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, LILACS, BBO, ClinicalTrials.gov, the National Research Register, and ProQuest Dissertation and Thesis database. Randomized and non-randomized controlled clinical trials, prospective cohort studies, and case series (minimum sample size of 20) with minimum follow-up periods of 6 months reporting periodontal health, survival and failure rates of retainers, cost-effectiveness, and impact of orthodontic retainers on patient-reported outcomes were identified. The Cochrane Collaboration's Risk of Bias tool and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale were used to assess the quality of included trials.
RESULTS
Twenty-four studies were identified, 18 randomized controlled trials and 6 prospective cohort studies. Of these, only 16 were deemed to be of high quality. Meta-analysis was unfeasible due to considerable clinical heterogeneity and variations in outcome measures. The mean failure risk for mandibular stainless steel fixed retainers bonded from canine to canine was 0.29 (95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.26, 0.33) and for those bonded to canines only was 0.25 (95 % CI: 0.16, 0.33). A meta-regression suggested that failure of fixed stainless steel mandibular retainers was not directly related to the period elapsed since placement (P = 0.938).
CONCLUSION
Further well-designed prospective studies are needed to elucidate the benefits and potential harms associated with orthodontic retainers.
Topics: Cost-Benefit Analysis; Humans; Mandible; Meta-Analysis as Topic; Non-Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Orthodontic Retainers; Orthodontics, Corrective; Periodontal Diseases; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Stainless Steel; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 27459974
DOI: 10.1186/s40510-016-0137-x