Article | Treatment duration (months) | X-ray | Root resorption (RR) | RR - specific tooth and severity | Additional information |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
DeShields [[32]] | M = 20.5 | PA | 51/52 cases had resorption in at least 1 Mx incisor | Tooth 12a | Treatment time edgewise (months) |
 | F = 22.5 |  |  |  Grade 0 - 1/52 |  Male = 11.6 |
 | G = 21.6 ± 5.2 |  | Severitya |  Grade 1 - 4/52 |  Female = 10.1 |
 |  |  |  Grade 0 - 12/208 |  Grade 2 - 23/52 |  Mean = 10.8 ± 5.7 |
 |  |  |  Grade 1 - 24/208 |  Grade 3 - 21/52 | Headgear time (if used) (months) |
 |  |  |  Grade 2 - 82/208 |  Grade 4 - 3/52 |  Male = 16.5 |
 |  |  |  Grade 3 - 79/208 | Tooth 11a |  Female = 17.0 |
 |  |  |  Grade 4 - 11/208 |  Grade 0 - 4/52 |  Mean = 16.8 ± 7.6 |
 |  |  |  Grade 5 - 0/208 |  Grade 1 - 7/52 | Class II elastics (if used) (months) |
 |  |  | Gender-severitya |  Grade 2 - 19/52 |  Male = 7.5 |
 |  |  |  4 M - grade 2 |  Grade 3 - 17/52 |  Female = 5.2 |
 |  |  |  17 M - grade 3 |  Grade 4 - 5/52 |  Mean = 6.3 ± 5.6 |
 |  |  |  3 M - grade 4 | Tooth 21a |  |
 |  |  |  1 F - grade 1 |  Grade 0 - 3/52 |  |
 |  |  |  7 M - grade 2 |  Grade 1 - 5/52 |  |
 |  |  |  17 F - grade 3 |  Grade 2 - 26/52 |  |
 |  |  |  3 F - grade 4 |  Grade 3 - 17/52 |  |
 |  |  |  |  Grade 4 - 1/52 |  |
 |  |  |  | Tooth 22a |  |
 |  |  |  |  Grade 0 - 4/52 |  |
 |  |  |  |  Grade 1 - 8/52 |  |
 |  |  |  |  Grade 2 - 14/52 |  |
 |  |  |  |  Grade 3 - 24/52 |  |
 |  |  |  |  Grade 4 - 2/52 |  |
Hollender et al. [[33]] | Mean = 18 | PA | Grade I or II RRb | Tooth (grade 1 or 2 RR)b | Mx anterior teeth most affected |
 60/120 Teeth |  16 - 3/12 | 48/60 | |||
Severity |  15 - 3/12 | Lateral incisor | |||
 Grade 1 - 53/60 |  13 - 5/12 | 22/24 | |||
 Grade 2 - 7/60 |  12 - 11/12 | No grade 3 resorption | |||
 11 - 7/12 | |||||
 21 - 6/12 | |||||
 22 - 11/12 | |||||
 23 - 8/12 | |||||
 25 - 3/12 | |||||
 26 - 3/12 | |||||
Eisel et al. [[34]] | 38 ± 20 (total sample) | PA | Mean four upper incisors: | Not described | Only 29 patients had periapicals to quantify RR. No explanation why only these ones |
 Up to 1 mm, 21 individuals | |||||
 Between 1 and 2 mm, 6 individuals | |||||
 Between 2 and 3 mm, 1 individual | |||||
 More than 3 mm, 1 individual | |||||
Maximum for either upper incisor | |||||
 Up to 1 mm, 12 individuals | |||||
 Between 1 and 2 mm 6 individuals | |||||
 Between 2 and 3 mm 6 individuals | |||||
 More than 4 mm 5 individuals | |||||
RR dx through Linge and Linge method [[12]] | |||||
Reukers et al. [[35]] | Overall = 20.4 ± 6.0 | PA | Mean degree of resorption |  | Statistical test showed no difference in root resorption between straight wire and edgewise |
Straight wire = 21.6 ± 4.8 | |||||
 Overall – 7.8 ± 6.9% | |||||
Edgewise = 19.2 ± 6.0 |  Straight wire - 8.2 ± 6.4% | ||||
 Edgewise - 7.5 ± 7.6% | Study only focused on root resorption of Mx central incisors | ||||
Prevalence | |||||
 Overall - (40/61) 65.6% | |||||
 Straight wire - (24/32) 75% | |||||
 Edgewise - (16/29) 55% | |||||
Taner et al. [[36]] | 28.1 ± 9.0 | Ceph | Mean RR | N/A | N/A |
2.1 ± 1.6 mm | |||||
Mavragani et al. [[40]] | N/A | PA | Same data as 2002 | Same data as 2002 | Same data as 2002 |
Mavragani et al. [[37]] | N/A | PA | Tooth/median | Mean RR | Root elongation was noted for 50/280 teeth |
 Control |  12 - 1.86 ± 0.26 mm | ||||
 12 - 17.03 mm |  11 - 1.82 ± 0.26 mm | Age at T 1 was significantly higher among patients showing root shortening of lateral incisors than those showing root elongation (p < 0.05) | |||
 11 - 16.79 mm |  21 - 1.93 ± 0.25 mm | ||||
 21 - 16.69 mm |  22 - 1.78 ± 0.33 mm | ||||
 22 - 17.48 mm | Shortened roots | Roots that were incompletely developed before treatment reached a significantly greater length than those that were fully developed at the T 1 | |||
Shortened |  12 - 59/72 teeth | ||||
 12 - 14.55 mm |  11 - 60/72 teeth | ||||
 11 - 15.32 mm |  21 - 58/67 teeth | ||||
 21 - 15.30 mm |  22 - 53/69 teeth | ||||
 22 - 13.77 mm | |||||
Elongated | Elongated roots | ||||
 12 - 17.36 mm |  12 - 13/72 teeth | ||||
 11 - 17.56 mm |  11 - 12/72 teeth | ||||
 21 - 15.52 mm |  21 - 9/67 teeth | ||||
 22 - 16.85 mm |  22 - 16/69 teeth | ||||
Liou and Chang [[38]] | En-masse | PA | Group I | Group I | Group I (ANB 7.1° ± 1.9°) |
(Group I) 28.3 ± 7.3 | |||||
FFA |  16% to 20% (2.5 to 2.8 mm) |  12 - 20.0 ± 7.3% (2.7 ± 1.0 mm) | Group II (ANB 3.2° ± 2.9°) | ||
(Group II) 22.7 ± 5.0 | Group 2 | Apical RR of Mx central incisor was significantly correlated to the duration of treatment (p = 0.026) but not to the amount of en-masse retraction, intrusion, or palatal tipping of Mx incisors | |||
 13.4% to 14.4% (2.1 to 2.3 mm) |  11 - 19.6 ± 6.6% (2.8 ± 1.0 mm) | ||||
 21 - 16.8 ± 8.8% (2.5 ± 1.4 mm) | Mx lateral incisors was significantly greater in group I than in group II | ||||
 22 - 16.0 ± 9.2% (2.5 ± 1.5 mm) | |||||
Group II | |||||
 12 - 14.4 ± 7.3% (2.1 ± 1.4 mm) | |||||
 11 - 14.4 ± 8.5% (2.3 ± 1.7 mm) | |||||
 21 - 13.6 ± 7.6% (2.1 ± 1.5 mm) | |||||
 22 - 13.4 ± 7.3% (2.1 ± 1.3 mm) | |||||
Martins et al. [[39]] | 28.0 ± 9.4 | PA | RR severityc |  |  |
 0 = 0/112 (0%) | |||||
 1 = 19/112 (16.96%) | |||||
 2 = 39/112 (34.83%) | |||||
 3 = 47/112 (41.96%) | |||||
 4 = 7/112 (6.25%) |