固定矫治器治疗对根管治疗牙根吸收的影响:系统回顾和荟萃分析。

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q3 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
Yongfang Feng, Rong Wang, Yumin Zhou, Shengnan Zhan
{"title":"固定矫治器治疗对根管治疗牙根吸收的影响:系统回顾和荟萃分析。","authors":"Yongfang Feng, Rong Wang, Yumin Zhou, Shengnan Zhan","doi":"10.2340/aos.v84.43642","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The relationship between orthodontic treatment and root resorption in endodontically treated teeth remains controversial. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effects of fixed appliance treatment on root resorption in root canal-treated teeth compared to vital teeth.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A comprehensive literature search was conducted across multiple databases including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Sinomed, CNKI, and Wanfang. Studies comparing root resorption between root canal-treated teeth and vital teeth during orthodontic treatment were included. The methodological quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Standardized mean differences (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using random-effects models.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Ten studies involving 266 patients met the inclusion criteria. The overall effect showed no significant difference in root resorption between root canal-treated teeth and vital teeth (SMD = -0.08, 95% CI: -0.24 to 0.08, I² = 7.0%). Subgroup analyses revealed no significant differences based on measurement methods, extraction versus non-extraction treatment, or tooth position. However, extraction cases demonstrated a numerical trend toward greater root resorption in root canal-treated teeth (SMD = -0.70, 95% CI: -1.50 to 0.11, I² = 67.1%, p = 0.048), while the non-extraction group showed no meaningful differences (SMD = -0.07, 95% CI: -0.42 to 0.28, I² = 49.2%, p = 0.096).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This meta-analysis suggests that root canal-treated teeth do not show significantly different root resorption patterns compared to vital teeth during orthodontic treatment. However, extraction cases may require careful monitoring due to a tendency toward increased root resorption.</p>","PeriodicalId":7313,"journal":{"name":"Acta Odontologica Scandinavica","volume":"84 ","pages":"275-283"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Impact of fixed appliance treatment on root resorption in root canal-treated teeth: a systematic review and meta-analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Yongfang Feng, Rong Wang, Yumin Zhou, Shengnan Zhan\",\"doi\":\"10.2340/aos.v84.43642\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The relationship between orthodontic treatment and root resorption in endodontically treated teeth remains controversial. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effects of fixed appliance treatment on root resorption in root canal-treated teeth compared to vital teeth.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A comprehensive literature search was conducted across multiple databases including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Sinomed, CNKI, and Wanfang. Studies comparing root resorption between root canal-treated teeth and vital teeth during orthodontic treatment were included. The methodological quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Standardized mean differences (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using random-effects models.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Ten studies involving 266 patients met the inclusion criteria. The overall effect showed no significant difference in root resorption between root canal-treated teeth and vital teeth (SMD = -0.08, 95% CI: -0.24 to 0.08, I² = 7.0%). Subgroup analyses revealed no significant differences based on measurement methods, extraction versus non-extraction treatment, or tooth position. However, extraction cases demonstrated a numerical trend toward greater root resorption in root canal-treated teeth (SMD = -0.70, 95% CI: -1.50 to 0.11, I² = 67.1%, p = 0.048), while the non-extraction group showed no meaningful differences (SMD = -0.07, 95% CI: -0.42 to 0.28, I² = 49.2%, p = 0.096).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This meta-analysis suggests that root canal-treated teeth do not show significantly different root resorption patterns compared to vital teeth during orthodontic treatment. However, extraction cases may require careful monitoring due to a tendency toward increased root resorption.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7313,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Acta Odontologica Scandinavica\",\"volume\":\"84 \",\"pages\":\"275-283\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Acta Odontologica Scandinavica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2340/aos.v84.43642\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta Odontologica Scandinavica","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2340/aos.v84.43642","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:正畸治疗与牙根吸收的关系一直存在争议。本系统综述和荟萃分析旨在评估固定矫治器治疗对根管治疗牙齿的根吸收的影响,并与生命牙进行比较。方法:在PubMed、Embase、Cochrane Library、Web of Science、Sinomed、CNKI、万方等数据库进行综合文献检索。在正畸治疗中,比较根管治疗牙与生命牙的牙根吸收的研究也包括在内。采用Cochrane偏倚风险工具评估方法学质量。使用随机效应模型计算95%置信区间(CI)的标准化平均差(SMD)。结果:10项研究共266例患者符合纳入标准。总体效果显示根管治疗牙与生命牙的牙根吸收无显著差异(SMD = -0.08, 95% CI: -0.24 ~ 0.08, I²= 7.0%)。亚组分析显示,基于测量方法、拔牙与非拔牙治疗或牙齿位置,无显著差异。然而,拔牙组的牙根吸收在数值上有较大的趋势(SMD = -0.70, 95% CI: -1.50 ~ 0.11, I²= 67.1%,p = 0.048),而未拔牙组的差异无统计学意义(SMD = -0.07, 95% CI: -0.42 ~ 0.28, I²= 49.2%,p = 0.096)。结论:本荟萃分析表明,在正畸治疗期间,根管治疗的牙齿与生命牙相比,牙根吸收模式没有显着差异。然而,拔牙病例可能需要仔细监测,因为有增加牙根吸收的趋势。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Impact of fixed appliance treatment on root resorption in root canal-treated teeth: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Objective: The relationship between orthodontic treatment and root resorption in endodontically treated teeth remains controversial. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effects of fixed appliance treatment on root resorption in root canal-treated teeth compared to vital teeth.

Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted across multiple databases including PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Sinomed, CNKI, and Wanfang. Studies comparing root resorption between root canal-treated teeth and vital teeth during orthodontic treatment were included. The methodological quality was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Standardized mean differences (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated using random-effects models.

Results: Ten studies involving 266 patients met the inclusion criteria. The overall effect showed no significant difference in root resorption between root canal-treated teeth and vital teeth (SMD = -0.08, 95% CI: -0.24 to 0.08, I² = 7.0%). Subgroup analyses revealed no significant differences based on measurement methods, extraction versus non-extraction treatment, or tooth position. However, extraction cases demonstrated a numerical trend toward greater root resorption in root canal-treated teeth (SMD = -0.70, 95% CI: -1.50 to 0.11, I² = 67.1%, p = 0.048), while the non-extraction group showed no meaningful differences (SMD = -0.07, 95% CI: -0.42 to 0.28, I² = 49.2%, p = 0.096).

Conclusions: This meta-analysis suggests that root canal-treated teeth do not show significantly different root resorption patterns compared to vital teeth during orthodontic treatment. However, extraction cases may require careful monitoring due to a tendency toward increased root resorption.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Acta Odontologica Scandinavica
Acta Odontologica Scandinavica 医学-牙科与口腔外科
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
5.00%
发文量
69
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Acta Odontologica Scandinavica publishes papers conveying new knowledge within all areas of oral health and disease sciences.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信