Patient or population: patients need orthodontic treatments, settings: upper canines (RCT), intervention: minimally invasive surgical procedures, comparison: conventional treatment | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
Outcomes | Weighted mean difference (95 % CI) between minimally invasive surgical assisted vs. conventional retraction | No. of participants (studies) | Quality of the evidence (GRADE) | Comments |
Orthodontic tooth movement in mm (2 months) | The mean canine retraction in the intervention groups was 1.41 higher (0.81 to 2.01 higher). Relative effect (95 % CI): not estimable | 28 (2 studies SP) | ⊕⊕⊝⊝a Low | This outcome also measured at 1 month in 3 studies (38 patients): mean canine retraction in the intervention groups was 0.65 higher (0.54 to 0.76 higher) with a quality of evidence very low ⊕⊝⊝⊝b. Also, this outcome was assessed at 3 months in one study (18 patients). This study reported higher tooth movement by 2 mm with the minimally invasive surgical procedure, a statistically significant finding (MD = 2: 95 % CI 1.20 to 2.80) with a quality of evidence very low ⊕⊝⊝⊝c. |
Pain and discomfort | See comments Relative effect (95 % CI): not estimable | 10 (1 study, COMP) | ⊕⊝⊝⊝d Very low | The difference between the control and experimental groups was not significant (p > 0.5) at 1, 7, 14 and 28 days after retraction. |
13 (1 study, PG) | ⊕⊕⊝⊝e Low | There was no significant difference in the level of pain between the two groups immediately, 1 and 12 h and 7 days after piezocision (p > 0.05). We could not pool the results of the previous 2 trials which evaluated this outcome to quantitative synthesis due to differences in specific treatments (non-extraction vs. extraction). | ||
Adverse effects (periodontal problems) | See comments Relative effect (95 % CI): not estimable | 10 (1 study, SP) | ⊕⊕⊝⊝f Low | There was no significant difference in mobility scores of canines between the control and experimental groups pre- and post-distalization (p > 0.05). Similarly, there was no significant difference in gingival indices between both groups pre- and post-distalization (p > 0.05). |
Adverse effects anchorage loss | See comments Relative effect (95 % CI): not estimable | 10 (1 study, SP) | ⊕⊕⊝⊝f Low | There was significant difference in loss of anchorage between control and experimental groups (p < 0.05), the anchorage loss was lesser in the piezocision group. |
Adverse effects (unwanted tooth movement) | See comments Relative effect (95 % CI): not estimable | 18 (1 study, SP) | ⊕⊕⊝⊝g Low | There was no significant difference between control and experimental sides for canine tipping and rotation (p > 0.05). |
10 (1 study, SP) | ⊕⊕⊝⊝f Low | There was no significant difference between control and experimental sides for transversal changes (p > 0.05). |