根据头颅测量值确定成人患者III类错牙合的治疗方案:一项系统综述

IF 0.5 4区 医学 Q4 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE
S. Sivarajan, N. N. Zakaria, Noor Asyikin Azmily, M. C. Wey, M. A. El-Ghafour, Mona M. Salah Fayed
{"title":"根据头颅测量值确定成人患者III类错牙合的治疗方案:一项系统综述","authors":"S. Sivarajan, N. N. Zakaria, Noor Asyikin Azmily, M. C. Wey, M. A. El-Ghafour, Mona M. Salah Fayed","doi":"10.2478/aoj-2022-0021","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Objective The present systematic review aimed to determine cephalometric values that may be used as a guide in deciding between orthodontic camouflage and orthognathic surgery to treat a Class III malocclusion in adults. In addition, a secondary aim was to identify treatment complications and aesthetic perceptions by laypersons/orthodontists. Methods Without a language restriction, an electronic search of six databases and a hand search of three orthodontic journals were performed until September 2021. All studies comparing orthodontic camouflage and orthognathic surgery in Class III malocclusion patients, were included. Data extraction was carried out independently by two authors with disagreement resolved by a third author. The risk of bias related to individual studies was appraised using a modified version of the STROBE checklist. The results were summarised qualitatively, and no meta-analysis was undertaken due to the high heterogeneity between the studies. Results With the quality of evidence ranging from moderate to high, six retrospective studies were included. A cephalometric analysis comprising the Holdaway angle, overjet, the Wits appraisal, lower incisor inclination, the maxillary-mandibular ratio, overbite, gonial angle and an additional combination were used as a guide. No treatment complications were reported. One study examined the perception of facial profile attractiveness in borderline surgical Class III malocclusions and found no difference in outcome and significant improvements in both camouflage and surgical groups. Conclusion The existing evidence is insufficient to identify a cephalometric parameter threshold in deciding between orthodontic camouflage and orthognathic surgery. PROSPERO database protocol no. CRD42020165164.","PeriodicalId":48559,"journal":{"name":"Australasian Orthodontic Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Determination of treatment options for Class III malocclusions in adult patients based on cephalometric values: a systematic review\",\"authors\":\"S. Sivarajan, N. N. Zakaria, Noor Asyikin Azmily, M. C. Wey, M. A. El-Ghafour, Mona M. Salah Fayed\",\"doi\":\"10.2478/aoj-2022-0021\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Objective The present systematic review aimed to determine cephalometric values that may be used as a guide in deciding between orthodontic camouflage and orthognathic surgery to treat a Class III malocclusion in adults. In addition, a secondary aim was to identify treatment complications and aesthetic perceptions by laypersons/orthodontists. Methods Without a language restriction, an electronic search of six databases and a hand search of three orthodontic journals were performed until September 2021. All studies comparing orthodontic camouflage and orthognathic surgery in Class III malocclusion patients, were included. Data extraction was carried out independently by two authors with disagreement resolved by a third author. The risk of bias related to individual studies was appraised using a modified version of the STROBE checklist. The results were summarised qualitatively, and no meta-analysis was undertaken due to the high heterogeneity between the studies. Results With the quality of evidence ranging from moderate to high, six retrospective studies were included. A cephalometric analysis comprising the Holdaway angle, overjet, the Wits appraisal, lower incisor inclination, the maxillary-mandibular ratio, overbite, gonial angle and an additional combination were used as a guide. No treatment complications were reported. One study examined the perception of facial profile attractiveness in borderline surgical Class III malocclusions and found no difference in outcome and significant improvements in both camouflage and surgical groups. Conclusion The existing evidence is insufficient to identify a cephalometric parameter threshold in deciding between orthodontic camouflage and orthognathic surgery. PROSPERO database protocol no. CRD42020165164.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48559,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Australasian Orthodontic Journal\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Australasian Orthodontic Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2478/aoj-2022-0021\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australasian Orthodontic Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/aoj-2022-0021","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

摘要目的本系统综述旨在确定头颅测量值可作为正畸伪装和正颌手术治疗成人III类错牙合的指导。此外,第二个目的是确定治疗并发症和审美的外行人/正畸医生。方法截至2021年9月,在不受语言限制的情况下,对6个数据库进行电子检索,对3种正畸期刊进行手工检索。所有比较正畸伪装和正颌手术治疗III类错颌患者的研究均被纳入。数据提取由两位作者独立完成,分歧由第三位作者解决。使用修改后的STROBE检查表评估与个别研究相关的偏倚风险。结果进行了定性总结,由于研究之间的高度异质性,没有进行meta分析。结果纳入6项回顾性研究,证据质量从中等到高。颅面测量分析包括Holdaway角、上覆角、Wits评估、下切牙倾斜度、上颌-下颌比、上覆咬合、角角和其他组合作为指导。无治疗并发症报道。一项研究调查了边缘性手术III类错颌患者对面部轮廓吸引力的感知,发现伪装组和手术组在结果上没有差异,而且有显著改善。结论在正畸伪装与正颌手术的选择中,现有证据不足以确定颅面测量参数阈值。普洛斯佩罗数据库协议号。CRD42020165164。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Determination of treatment options for Class III malocclusions in adult patients based on cephalometric values: a systematic review
Abstract Objective The present systematic review aimed to determine cephalometric values that may be used as a guide in deciding between orthodontic camouflage and orthognathic surgery to treat a Class III malocclusion in adults. In addition, a secondary aim was to identify treatment complications and aesthetic perceptions by laypersons/orthodontists. Methods Without a language restriction, an electronic search of six databases and a hand search of three orthodontic journals were performed until September 2021. All studies comparing orthodontic camouflage and orthognathic surgery in Class III malocclusion patients, were included. Data extraction was carried out independently by two authors with disagreement resolved by a third author. The risk of bias related to individual studies was appraised using a modified version of the STROBE checklist. The results were summarised qualitatively, and no meta-analysis was undertaken due to the high heterogeneity between the studies. Results With the quality of evidence ranging from moderate to high, six retrospective studies were included. A cephalometric analysis comprising the Holdaway angle, overjet, the Wits appraisal, lower incisor inclination, the maxillary-mandibular ratio, overbite, gonial angle and an additional combination were used as a guide. No treatment complications were reported. One study examined the perception of facial profile attractiveness in borderline surgical Class III malocclusions and found no difference in outcome and significant improvements in both camouflage and surgical groups. Conclusion The existing evidence is insufficient to identify a cephalometric parameter threshold in deciding between orthodontic camouflage and orthognathic surgery. PROSPERO database protocol no. CRD42020165164.
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
Australasian Orthodontic Journal
Australasian Orthodontic Journal Dentistry-Orthodontics
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
25.00%
发文量
24
期刊介绍: The Australasian Orthodontic Journal (AOJ) is the official scientific publication of the Australian Society of Orthodontists. Previously titled the Australian Orthodontic Journal, the name of the publication was changed in 2017 to provide the region with additional representation because of a substantial increase in the number of submitted overseas'' manuscripts. The volume and issue numbers continue in sequence and only the ISSN numbers have been updated. The AOJ publishes original research papers, clinical reports, book reviews, abstracts from other journals, and other material which is of interest to orthodontists and is in the interest of their continuing education. It is published twice a year in November and May. The AOJ is indexed and abstracted by Science Citation Index Expanded (SciSearch) and Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition.
×
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