-
Dental and Medical Problems 2022External apical root resorption (EARR) is a serious complication that should be avoided during orthodontic treatment; this pathology depends on multiple factors. Data... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
External apical root resorption (EARR) is a serious complication that should be avoided during orthodontic treatment; this pathology depends on multiple factors. Data from clinical studies should be assessed to determine the influence these factors have on the development of EARR. This systematic review aims to compare EARR produced by different factors (orthodontic systems, dental trauma, and dental vitality). The protocol was registered on the PROSPERO database. The search was performed on 5 databases. Accepted study designs included randomized controlled trials, nonrandomized clinical trials, and observational studies. Full-text articles from clinical studies of EARR associated with orthodontic treatment in English, Spanish, or Portuguese with no publication date restrictions were selected. Data from the studies, such as age, population, study groups, and outcome measures, were recorded. Multiple meta-analyses were performed with data from the included studies. Evidence suggests that EARR induced by orthodontic treatment is similar, regardless of the technique used. Evidence of the effect of previous dental trauma on EARR during orthodontic treatment is limited. There is less EARR associated with orthodontic treatment in endodontically treated teeth than in vital teeth. These conclusions should be considered with caution due to the low certainty of the evidence.
Topics: Humans; Orthodontic Appliances, Fixed; Root Resorption; Tooth, Nonvital; Clinical Trials as Topic
PubMed: 36206494
DOI: 10.17219/dmp/145369 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2015External root resorption is a pathological process, which tends to occur following a wide range of mechanical or chemical stimuli such as infection, pressure, trauma or... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
External root resorption is a pathological process, which tends to occur following a wide range of mechanical or chemical stimuli such as infection, pressure, trauma or orthodontic tooth movement. Although it is predominantly detected by radiography, in some cases root resorption may be identified by clinical symptoms such as pain, swelling and mobility of the tooth. Treatment alternatives are case-dependent and aim to address the cause of the resorption and aid the regeneration of the resorptive lesion.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effectiveness of any interventions that can be used in the management of external root resorption in permanent teeth.
SEARCH METHODS
The following electronic databases were searched: the Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register (to 14 October 2015), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library, 2015, Issue 9), MEDLINE via OVID (1946 to 14 October 2015) and EMBASE via OVID (1980 to 14 October 2015). We searched the US National Institutes of Health Trials Register (http://clinicaltrials.gov) and the WHO Clinical Trials Registry Platform for ongoing trials. No restrictions were placed on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials of permanent teeth with any type of external root resorption, which has been confirmed by clinical and radiological examination, comparing one type of intervention (root canal medications and canal filling, splinting or extraction of teeth or the surgical removal of any relevant pathology) with another, or with placebo or no treatment.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors screened search records independently. Full papers were obtained for potentially relevant trials. If data had been extracted, the statistical guidelines set out in the Cochrane Handbook would have been followed.
MAIN RESULTS
No randomised controlled trials that met the inclusion criteria were identified. However, we identified one ongoing study that is potentially relevant to this review and will be assessed when it is published.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
We were unable to identify any reports of randomised controlled trials regarding the efficacy of different interventions for the management of external root resorption. In view of the lack of reliable evidence on this topic, clinicians must decide on the most appropriate means of managing this condition according to their clinical experience with regard to patient-related factors. There is a need for well designed and conducted clinical trials on this topic, which conform to the CONSORT statement (www.consort-statement.org/).
Topics: Dentition, Permanent; Humans; Root Resorption
PubMed: 26599212
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008003.pub3 -
Journal of Prosthodontic Research Jan 2022Dental implant therapy is a common clinical treatment for missing teeth. However, the esthetic result is not as satisfactory as expected in some cases, especially in the...
PURPOSE
Dental implant therapy is a common clinical treatment for missing teeth. However, the esthetic result is not as satisfactory as expected in some cases, especially in the anterior maxillary area. Poor esthetic results are caused by inadequate preparation of the hard and soft tissues in this area before treatment. The socket shield technique may be an alternative for a desirable esthetic outcome in dental implant treatments.
STUDY SELECTION
In the present systematic review, PubMed-Medline, Google Scholar, and ScienceDirect were searched for clinical studies published from January 2000 to December 2018.
RESULTS
Twenty studies were included, comprising one randomized controlled trial, two cohort studies, 14 clinical human case reports, and three retrospective case series. In total, 288 patients treated with the socket shield technique with immediate implant placement and follow-up between 3-60 months after placement were included. A quality assessment showed that 12 of the 20 included studies were of good quality. Twenty-six of the 274 (9.5%) cases developed complications or adverse effects related to the socket shield technique. Most studies reported implant survival without the complications (90.5%); most of the cases that were followed up for more than 12 months after implant placement achieved a good esthetic appearance. The failure rate was low without the complications, although there were some failures due to failed implant osseointegration, socket shield mobility and infection, socket shield exposure, socket shield migration, and apical root resorption.
CONCLUSIONS
The socket shield technique can be used in dental implant treatment, but it remains difficult to predict the long-term success of this technique until high-quality evidence becomes available.
Topics: Dental Implantation, Endosseous; Dental Implants; Dental Implants, Single-Tooth; Esthetics, Dental; Humans; Immediate Dental Implant Loading; Retrospective Studies; Tooth Extraction; Tooth Socket; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33692284
DOI: 10.2186/jpr.JPR_D_20_00054 -
Journal of Oral & Maxillofacial Research 2019To review and assess the efficiency of different post extraction socket preservation techniques. (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVES
To review and assess the efficiency of different post extraction socket preservation techniques.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
An electronic literature search was performed on the MEDLINE and Embase databases. The review included human studies published between from January 1, 2007 to January 1, 2018, in English. Outcome measures included dimensional changes and/or histological evaluation of alveolar bone.
RESULTS
Twenty-six full text articles were reviewed, 16 of which met the inclusion criteria and were selected for the study. Autogenous tooth graft prevented vertical resorption the most: -0.28 (SD 0.13) mm, observation period (OP): 4 months, while the least effective approach was beta tri-calcium phosphate (β-TCP): -1.72 (SD 0.56) mm, OP: 4 months. Estimating horizontal resorption, the most effective technique was biphasic calcium sulphate (BCS) with β-TCP and hydroxyapatite (HA) - BCS + TCP + HA: 0.03 (SD 2.32) mm, OP: 4 months, while β-TCP was the least efficient: -1.45 (SD 0.4) mm, OP: 4 months. Evaluating residual graft particles (RG) and newly formed bone (NFB) ratio the best results were achieved with demineralized freeze-dried bone allograft: RG: 8.88%, NFB: 38.42%, OP: 5 months, whereas magnesium-enriched hydroxyapatite was least effective: RG: 40.82%, NFB: 31.85%, OP: 4 months.
CONCLUSIONS
This review revealed that even though there are numerous types of biomaterials for socket preservation none of them can completely stop alveolar bone loss after tooth extraction. Furthermore, lack of information about qualitative evaluation of bone was noticed indicating that further studies regarding this topic are needed.
PubMed: 31069040
DOI: 10.5037/jomr.2019.10102 -
Journal of Personalized Medicine Jul 2022Many causes of resorption remain unclear and are thus identified as idiopathic. In such cases, management is difficult, especially when multiple teeth are involved. The... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Many causes of resorption remain unclear and are thus identified as idiopathic. In such cases, management is difficult, especially when multiple teeth are involved. The aim of the present study was to assess the literature regarding the medical, clinical, and radiographic aspects of multiple idiopathic resorptions (MIR) and to examine the factors associated with the risk of extraction.
METHODS
The title and protocol were registered a priori in PROSPERO (CRD42020191564), and the study followed the PRISMA methodology. Four electronic databases were searched to include reviews and case reports on MIR in permanent dentition.
RESULTS
Among the 1035 articles identified, 31 case reports were included. The mean age of the patients was 32 years (SD = 16.4). MIR were consistently diagnosed after radiographic evaluation and were undetected during intra-oral examination in 62% of cases. The treatment involved extraction in 77% of cases. The risk of extraction increased in the presence of periodontal inflammation.
CONCLUSIONS
MIR are aggressive forms of resorption requiring routine visits. MIR mostly involve extraction and lead to a challenging prosthetic rehabilitation due to severely damaged abutment teeth. However, the current knowledge on MIR remains fragmental and based on a limited number of case reports.
PubMed: 35887679
DOI: 10.3390/jpm12071182 -
Progress in Orthodontics Mar 2021This review synthesizes the available evidence about the predisposition of individuals with asthma or allergies to orthodontically induced inflammatory root resorption... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
This review synthesizes the available evidence about the predisposition of individuals with asthma or allergies to orthodontically induced inflammatory root resorption (OIIRR) and possible factors related to root resorption that were investigated in the included studies, such as the type of malocclusion, duration of orthodontic treatment, and tooth units.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
Six electronic databases and partial gray literature were searched without date or language restrictions until September 2020. Prospective and retrospective observational cohort and case-control studies were included. The risk of bias (RoB) was assessed using the checklists from the Joanna Briggs Institute and the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE tool. To complement the case-control studies, the odds ratio (OR) of the individuals with allergies/asthma to develop root resorption was calculated.
RESULTS
Six studies were included. One study with low RoB, one with moderate, and one with high RoB stated that allergic patients did not report a greater chance of developing OIIRR (OR = 1.17 to 2.10, p = 0.1 to 1), while only one study with low RoB reported that individuals with allergies tend to develop root resorption (OR = 2.4, 95% CI = 1.08-5.37). Three studies with low RoB and one with moderate showed no significant association between asthma and OIIRR (OR = 1.05 to 3.42, p = 0.12 to 0.94). No association was identified between the type of malocclusion and the degree of OIIRR. Uniradicular dental units and a prolonged treatment time seem to be associated with an increased risk of resorption. The certainty of the evidence was considered low for both exposure factors.
CONCLUSION
Evidence with a low level of certainty indicates that individuals with allergies or asthma are not more predisposed to OIIRR. Uniradicular teeth and long-term orthodontic treatments are associated with a higher risk of OIIRR.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
PROSPERO CRD42020188463.
Topics: Asthma; Humans; Malocclusion; Prospective Studies; Retrospective Studies; Root Resorption; Tooth Movement Techniques
PubMed: 33718992
DOI: 10.1186/s40510-021-00351-x -
Journal of Periodontology Mar 2020Orthodontic treatment can greatly impact the periodontium, especially in dentitions with a thin periodontal phenotype. Orthodontic tooth movement can result into...
BACKGROUND
Orthodontic treatment can greatly impact the periodontium, especially in dentitions with a thin periodontal phenotype. Orthodontic tooth movement can result into iatrogenic sequelae to these vulnerable anatomic conditions, such as development and exacerbation of bony dehiscence or fenestration defects, which can manifest loss of periodontal support and gingival recession (GR). This systematic review aimed to investigate whether periodontal phenotype modification therapy (PhMT) involving hard tissue augmentation (PhMT-b) or soft tissue augmentation (PhMT-s) has clinical benefits for patients undergoing orthodontic treatment.
METHODS
An electronic search was performed in two major databases for journals published in English language from January 1975 to January 2019 and a hand search of printed journals was also performed to identify human clinical trials reporting clinical and radiographic outcomes of patients receiving orthodontic treatment with or without hard and soft tissue augmentation procedures. Data were extracted and organized into tables for qualitative assessment.
RESULTS
Eight studies were identified evaluating the outcomes of PhMT in patients undergoing orthodontic therapy. Six studies evaluated patients receiving PhMT-b via corticotomy-assisted orthodontic therapy (CAOT) and simultaneous bone augmentation while the other two received PhMT-s before tooth movement. No studies investigated PhMT-b alone without CAOT and most studies focused on the mandibular anterior decompensation movements. There was high heterogeneity in the study design and inconsistency of the reported outcomes; therefore, a meta-analysis was not performed. Evidence at this moment supports CAOT with hard tissue augmentation accelerated tooth movement. However, only two studies provided direct comparison to support that CAOT with PhMT-b reduced the overall treatment time compared with conventional orthodontic treatment. No periodontal complications or evidence of severe root resorption were reported for both groups. Four studies provided radiographic assessment of the PhMT-b and demonstrated increased radiographic density or thicker facial bone after the treatment. Two studies reported an expanded tooth movement. One study reported an increase in keratinized tissue width post-CAOT plus PhMT-b, while another study with a 10-year follow-up showed a lower degree of relapse using the mandibular irregularity index when compared with conventional tooth movement alone. Two studies examined the effect of PhMT-s before orthodontic treatment. Unfortunately, no conclusions can be drawn because of the limited number of studies with contradicting outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS
Within the limited studies included in this systematic review, PhMT-b via particulate bone grafting together with CAOT may provide clinical benefits such as modifying periodontal phenotype, maintaining or enhancing facial bone thickness, accelerating tooth movement, expanding the scope of safe tooth movement for patients undergoing orthodontic tooth movement. The benefits of PhMT-s alone for orthodontic treatment remain undetermined due to limited studies available. However, PhMT-b appears promising and with many potential benefits for patients undergoing orthodontic tooth movement. There is a need for a higher quality of randomized controlled trials or case control studies with longer follow-up to investigate the effects of different grafting materials and surgical sites other than mandibular anterior region.
Topics: Bone Transplantation; Gingival Recession; Humans; Phenotype; Root Resorption; Tooth Movement Techniques; United States
PubMed: 31670836
DOI: 10.1002/JPER.19-0037 -
The Angle Orthodontist Mar 2020To evaluate systematically the effectiveness of miniscrew-supported maxillary incisor intrusion compared with other nonsurgical intrusive mechanics for deep-bite... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate systematically the effectiveness of miniscrew-supported maxillary incisor intrusion compared with other nonsurgical intrusive mechanics for deep-bite correction.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Unrestricted electronic searches in Embase, Web of Science, MEDLINE, LILACS, and Cochrane's CENTRAL as well as manual searches were conducted up to August 2019. Only randomized clinical trials (RCTs) were included. Study selection, data extraction, and bias assessment were done by two independent reviewers. The Cochrane risk-of-bias tool was used, and the quality of evidence was graded using the GRADE approach. A random-effects meta-analysis of continuous data, with its 95% confidence intervals (CIs), was used.
RESULTS
Seven RCTs were included in the quantitative synthesis, and the overall quality of evidence was very low to low. When compared with intrusion arches, miniscrews resulted in a more efficient deep-bite reduction with a standardized mean difference (SMD) of -0.48 (95% CI, -0.89 to -0.07). When miniscrews were used, a statistically significant difference was observed favoring less maxillary molar extrusion (SMD, -0.86; 95% CI, -1.46 to -0.27) and more incisor intrusion as measured from centroid to palatal plane (SMD, -0.95; 95% CI, -1.41 to -0.49). Results also showed a statistically nonsignificant difference regarding the amount of resultant root resorption between miniscrews and intrusion arches.
CONCLUSIONS
There is weak evidence indicating efficient deep-bite correction using miniscrews. Root resorption seems to be an associated adverse effect that occurs regardless of the intrusive mechanics used. These conclusions should be viewed with great caution as further well-designed long-term research is recommended.
Topics: Bone Screws; Humans; Incisor; Orthodontic Anchorage Procedures; Overbite; Tooth Movement Techniques
PubMed: 31816252
DOI: 10.2319/061119-400.1 -
Journal of Oral Biology and... 2022Photobiomodulation has been gaining traction as a plausible therapy to control orthodontically induced root resorption. (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Photobiomodulation has been gaining traction as a plausible therapy to control orthodontically induced root resorption.
AIM
The aim of the present review was to systematically appraise randomized controlled trials conducted to study the influence of photobiomodulation on external root resorption during orthodontic movement in humans.
METHOD
ology - A systematic search was carried out employing keywords in various electronic databases namely MEDLINE (Pubmed), Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, Semantic Scholar, ScienceDirect and Opengrey.eu for studies up to March 2020. Pre-defined inclusion and exclusion criteria were used to select the studies. Data extraction was carried out and the risk of bias was assessed using Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Meta-analysis was conducted using random effects model for selected studies. Subgroup analysis was conducted for resorption on each axial surface of the tooth root viz. mesial, buccal, distal and palatal as well as for vertical thirds viz. cervical, middle and apical third. Summary of Findings was formulated according to GRADE Profile.
RESULTS
The search retrieved 1509 results out of which six studies were included for the systematic review. Two studies showed low overall risk of bias and the remaining four showed unclear risk of bias. The meta-analysis was conducted for three studies with an overall sample size of 120 teeth which showed a pooled mean difference of 0.08 (95% CI 0.15 - (-0.02) to 1.96, p=<0.0001) in favour of photobiomodulation group with respect to mean total resorption per tooth. I index revealed 88% heterogeneity.
CONCLUSION
It is concluded that there is moderate grade of evidence to suggest beneficial effect of photobiomodulation on root resorption. Further high-quality randomized controlled trials with standardized intervention parameters are recommended.
REGISTRATION
PROSPERO registration number - CRD42020167291.
PubMed: 35692967
DOI: 10.1016/j.jobcr.2022.05.014 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2020Prophylactic removal of asymptomatic disease-free impacted wisdom teeth is the surgical removal of wisdom teeth in the absence of symptoms and with no evidence of local...
BACKGROUND
Prophylactic removal of asymptomatic disease-free impacted wisdom teeth is the surgical removal of wisdom teeth in the absence of symptoms and with no evidence of local disease. Impacted wisdom teeth may be associated with pathological changes, such as pericoronitis, root resorption, gum and alveolar bone disease (periodontitis), caries and the development of cysts and tumours. When surgical removal is performed in older people, the risk of postoperative complications, pain and discomfort is increased. Other reasons to justify prophylactic removal of asymptomatic disease-free impacted third molars have included preventing late lower incisor crowding, preventing damage to adjacent structures such as the second molar or the inferior alveolar nerve, in preparation for orthognathic surgery, in preparation for radiotherapy or during procedures to treat people with trauma to the affected area. Removal of asymptomatic disease-free wisdom teeth is a common procedure, and researchers must determine whether evidence supports this practice. This review is an update of an review originally published in 2005 and previously updated in 2012 and 2016.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effects of removal compared with retention (conservative management) of asymptomatic disease-free impacted wisdom teeth in adolescents and adults.
SEARCH METHODS
Cochrane Oral Health's Information Specialist searched the following databases: Cochrane Oral Health's Trials Register (to 10 May 2019), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library, 2019, Issue 4), MEDLINE Ovid (1946 to 10 May 2019), and Embase Ovid (1980 to 10 May 2019). The US National Institutes of Health Trials Registry (ClinicalTrials.gov)and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform were searched for ongoing trials. No restrictions were placed on the language or date of publication when searching the electronic databases. .
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs), with no restriction on length of follow-up, comparing removal (or absence) with retention (or presence) of asymptomatic disease-free impacted wisdom teeth in adolescents or adults. We also considered quasi-RCTs and prospective cohort studies for inclusion if investigators measured outcomes with follow-up of five years or longer.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Eight review authors screened search results and assessed the eligibility of studies for inclusion according to the review inclusion criteria. Eight review authors independently and in duplicate conducted the risk of bias assessments. When information was unclear, we contacted the study authors for additional information.
MAIN RESULTS
This review update includes the same two studies that were identified in our previous version of the review: one RCT with a parallel-group design, which was conducted in a dental hospital setting in the United Kingdom, and one prospective cohort study, which was conducted in the private sector in the USA. Primary outcome No eligible studies in this review reported the effects of removal compared with retention of asymptomatic disease-free impacted wisdom teeth on health-related quality of life Secondary outcomes We found only low- to very low-certainty evidence of the effects of removal compared with retention of asymptomatic disease-free impacted wisdom teeth for a limited number of secondary outcome measures. One prospective cohort study, reporting data from a subgroup of 416 healthy male participants, aged 24 to 84 years, compared the effects of the absence (previous removal or agenesis) against the presence of asymptomatic disease-free impacted wisdom teeth on periodontitis and caries associated with the distal aspect of the adjacent second molar during a follow-up period of three to over 25 years. Very low-certainty evidence suggests that the presence of asymptomatic disease-free impacted wisdom teeth may be associated with increased risk of periodontitis affecting the adjacent second molar in the long term. In the same study, which is at serious risk of bias, there is insufficient evidence to demonstrate a difference in caries risk associated with the presence or absence of impacted wisdom teeth. One RCT with 164 randomised and 77 analysed adolescent participants compared the effect of extraction with retention of asymptomatic disease-free impacted wisdom teeth on dimensional changes in the dental arch after five years. Participants (55% female) had previously undergone orthodontic treatment and had 'crowded' wisdom teeth. No evidence from this study, which was at high risk of bias, was found to suggest that removal of asymptomatic disease-free impacted wisdom teeth has a clinically significant effect on dimensional changes in the dental arch. The included studies did not measure any of our other secondary outcomes: costs, other adverse events associated with retention of asymptomatic disease-free impacted wisdom teeth (pericoronitis, root resorption, cyst formation, tumour formation, inflammation/infection) and adverse effects associated with their removal (alveolar osteitis/postoperative infection, nerve injury, damage to adjacent teeth during surgery, bleeding, osteonecrosis related to medication/radiotherapy, inflammation/infection).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Insufficient evidence is available to determine whether asymptomatic disease-free impacted wisdom teeth should be removed or retained. Although retention of asymptomatic disease-free impacted wisdom teeth may be associated with increased risk of periodontitis affecting adjacent second molars in the long term, the evidence is very low certainty. Well-designed RCTs investigating long-term and rare effects of retention and removal of asymptomatic disease-free impacted wisdom teeth, in a representative group of individuals, are unlikely to be feasible. In their continuing absence, high quality, long-term prospective cohort studies may provide valuable evidence in the future. Given the current lack of available evidence, patient values should be considered and clinical expertise used to guide shared decision-making with people who have asymptomatic disease-free impacted wisdom teeth. If the decision is made to retain these teeth, clinical assessment at regular intervals to prevent undesirable outcomes is advisable.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Asymptomatic Diseases; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Molar, Third; Prospective Studies; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Tooth Extraction; Tooth, Impacted; Watchful Waiting
PubMed: 32368796
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003879.pub5