{"title":"使用透明矫治器和固定矫治器治疗的受试者根尖外吸收的比较评估:系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Swati Singh, Ravindra Kumar Jain, Arthi Balasubramaniam","doi":"10.34172/joddd.40932","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This review aims to collate and analyze the existing evidence on the comparison of external apical root resorption (EARR) in subjects treated with clear aligners (CAs) and fixed appliances (FA). An electronic search was conducted in six databases for articles published in all languages until July 2023. Studies that evaluated EARR in subjects treated with CAs and FAs were included. The RoB 2 tool for RCTs and the ROBINS-I tool for non-randomized studies were used to analyze the risk of bias (ROB). A random effects meta-analysis was performed to assess EARR extent in maxillary and mandibular anterior teeth for subjects treated with CAs and FAs. Ten studies (eight retrospective, one RCT, and one CCT) were included in this review, out of which six studies reported a moderate ROB, one reported a serious ROB, and three reported a low ROB on qualitative analysis. The quantitative analysis of six studies revealed a significant intergroup difference (<i>P</i><0.05) in the mean EARR for maxillary central (SMD=-0.62, <i>P</i><0.00001) and lateral incisors (SMD=-0.47, <i>P</i>=0.01) with a moderate heterogeneity (I<sup>2</sup>=56%), as well as the mandibular central incisors (SMD=-0.27, <i>P</i>=0.04) with high heterogeneity (I<sup>2</sup>=79%). EARR was lower in subjects treated with CAs than FAs. A moderate quality of the available evidence suggests that EARR was less evident in subjects treated with CAs when compared with FAs.</p>","PeriodicalId":15599,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Dental Research, Dental Clinics, Dental Prospects","volume":"18 2","pages":"85-94"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11282194/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comparative assessment of external apical root resorption between subjects treated with clear aligners and fixed orthodontic appliances: A systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Swati Singh, Ravindra Kumar Jain, Arthi Balasubramaniam\",\"doi\":\"10.34172/joddd.40932\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This review aims to collate and analyze the existing evidence on the comparison of external apical root resorption (EARR) in subjects treated with clear aligners (CAs) and fixed appliances (FA). An electronic search was conducted in six databases for articles published in all languages until July 2023. Studies that evaluated EARR in subjects treated with CAs and FAs were included. The RoB 2 tool for RCTs and the ROBINS-I tool for non-randomized studies were used to analyze the risk of bias (ROB). A random effects meta-analysis was performed to assess EARR extent in maxillary and mandibular anterior teeth for subjects treated with CAs and FAs. Ten studies (eight retrospective, one RCT, and one CCT) were included in this review, out of which six studies reported a moderate ROB, one reported a serious ROB, and three reported a low ROB on qualitative analysis. The quantitative analysis of six studies revealed a significant intergroup difference (<i>P</i><0.05) in the mean EARR for maxillary central (SMD=-0.62, <i>P</i><0.00001) and lateral incisors (SMD=-0.47, <i>P</i>=0.01) with a moderate heterogeneity (I<sup>2</sup>=56%), as well as the mandibular central incisors (SMD=-0.27, <i>P</i>=0.04) with high heterogeneity (I<sup>2</sup>=79%). EARR was lower in subjects treated with CAs than FAs. A moderate quality of the available evidence suggests that EARR was less evident in subjects treated with CAs when compared with FAs.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15599,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Dental Research, Dental Clinics, Dental Prospects\",\"volume\":\"18 2\",\"pages\":\"85-94\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11282194/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Dental Research, Dental Clinics, Dental Prospects\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.34172/joddd.40932\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/6/24 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Dentistry\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Dental Research, Dental Clinics, Dental Prospects","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.34172/joddd.40932","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Dentistry","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
本综述旨在整理和分析现有证据,比较透明矫治器(CAs)和固定矫治器(FA)治疗对象的外牙根尖吸收(EARR)情况。我们在六个数据库中对 2023 年 7 月之前发表的所有语言的文章进行了电子检索。纳入了对使用透明矫治器和固定矫治器治疗的受试者的 EARR 进行评估的研究。使用RoB 2工具(针对RCT)和ROBINS-I工具(针对非随机研究)分析偏倚风险(ROB)。随机效应荟萃分析评估了接受 CA 和 FA 治疗的受试者上颌和下颌前牙的 EARR 程度。本综述共纳入了 10 项研究(8 项回顾性研究、1 项 RCT 研究和 1 项 CCT 研究),其中 6 项研究的 ROB 为中度,1 项研究的 ROB 为重度,3 项研究的 ROB 为低度。六项研究的定量分析显示,组间差异显著(PPP=0.01),异质性为中度(I2=56%);下颌中切牙差异显著(SMD=-0.27,P=0.04),异质性为高度(I2=79%)。接受 CA 治疗的受试者的 EARR 低于接受 FA 治疗的受试者。现有证据的中等质量表明,与 FAs 相比,EARR 在接受 CAs 治疗的受试者中较不明显。
Comparative assessment of external apical root resorption between subjects treated with clear aligners and fixed orthodontic appliances: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
This review aims to collate and analyze the existing evidence on the comparison of external apical root resorption (EARR) in subjects treated with clear aligners (CAs) and fixed appliances (FA). An electronic search was conducted in six databases for articles published in all languages until July 2023. Studies that evaluated EARR in subjects treated with CAs and FAs were included. The RoB 2 tool for RCTs and the ROBINS-I tool for non-randomized studies were used to analyze the risk of bias (ROB). A random effects meta-analysis was performed to assess EARR extent in maxillary and mandibular anterior teeth for subjects treated with CAs and FAs. Ten studies (eight retrospective, one RCT, and one CCT) were included in this review, out of which six studies reported a moderate ROB, one reported a serious ROB, and three reported a low ROB on qualitative analysis. The quantitative analysis of six studies revealed a significant intergroup difference (P<0.05) in the mean EARR for maxillary central (SMD=-0.62, P<0.00001) and lateral incisors (SMD=-0.47, P=0.01) with a moderate heterogeneity (I2=56%), as well as the mandibular central incisors (SMD=-0.27, P=0.04) with high heterogeneity (I2=79%). EARR was lower in subjects treated with CAs than FAs. A moderate quality of the available evidence suggests that EARR was less evident in subjects treated with CAs when compared with FAs.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Dental Research Dental Clinics Dental Prospects (JODDD) is a Platinum* Open Access, peer-reviewed quarterly indexed journal that publishes articles of basic, clinical, and prospective nature in all areas of dentistry and oral health.