Is there a better interceptive treatment for unerupted palatally displaced canines? : anetwork meta-analysis
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2022 |
Outros Autores: | , , , , , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Repositório Institucional da UFRGS |
Texto Completo: | http://hdl.handle.net/10183/274757 |
Resumo: | This systematic review aimed to investigate if there is a better interceptive treatment for palatally displaced canines (PDC) in the mixed dentition stage. The PubMed/MEDLINE, CENTRAL, Scopus, and EMBASE databases were searched for randomized clinical trials related to the research topic. The gray literature and reference lists were also assessed. Network meta-analysis was conducted to analyze the effects of different approaches on PDC eruption. The surface under the cumulative ranking area was calculated to rank the treatments. The certainty of the evidence was evaluated using the GRADE approach. Of the 892 eligible studies, 18 were selected for full-text analysis and 9 for meta-analysis, involving 506 participants and 730 PDC, to compare 9 approaches. The proportion of erupted PDC was significantly higher for all interceptive treatments compared with control (no intervention). Furthermore, the proportion of erupted PDC was higher in patients subjected to rapid maxillary expansion (RME) than those who underwent double extraction of primary canine and primary molar (relative risk (RR) = 2.68 ICr95%: 1.12–9.35). A higher proportion of erupted PDC was found for RME (RR = 3.07 ICr95%: 1.31–10.67), RME plus use of transpalatal arch (TA) plus extraction of primary canine(s) (EC) (RR = 1.43 ICr95%: 1.09–1.95), EC plus use of cervical pull headgear (RR = 1.38 ICr95%: 1.11–1.79), and EC plus use of TA (RR = 1.36 ICr95%: 1.00–1.9) than for EC. RME was most likely to be considered as the best interceptive treatment. Overall, the certainty of the evidence was considered low due to imprecision and indirectness. In conclusion, no intervention in the mixed dentition stage is the worst choice for PDC. |
id |
UFRGS-2_6679b1e4080d1ecffd5447cb5c8884f9 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:www.lume.ufrgs.br:10183/274757 |
network_acronym_str |
UFRGS-2 |
network_name_str |
Repositório Institucional da UFRGS |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Araújo, Viviane Zis deHeckmann, Sani SilvaAraujo, Fernando Borba deZiegelmann, Patricia KlarmannLenzi, Tathiane LarissaCasagrande, LucianoAraújo, Eustáquio AfonsoMarques, Leandro Silva2024-04-16T06:36:07Z20221806-8324http://hdl.handle.net/10183/274757001200737This systematic review aimed to investigate if there is a better interceptive treatment for palatally displaced canines (PDC) in the mixed dentition stage. The PubMed/MEDLINE, CENTRAL, Scopus, and EMBASE databases were searched for randomized clinical trials related to the research topic. The gray literature and reference lists were also assessed. Network meta-analysis was conducted to analyze the effects of different approaches on PDC eruption. The surface under the cumulative ranking area was calculated to rank the treatments. The certainty of the evidence was evaluated using the GRADE approach. Of the 892 eligible studies, 18 were selected for full-text analysis and 9 for meta-analysis, involving 506 participants and 730 PDC, to compare 9 approaches. The proportion of erupted PDC was significantly higher for all interceptive treatments compared with control (no intervention). Furthermore, the proportion of erupted PDC was higher in patients subjected to rapid maxillary expansion (RME) than those who underwent double extraction of primary canine and primary molar (relative risk (RR) = 2.68 ICr95%: 1.12–9.35). A higher proportion of erupted PDC was found for RME (RR = 3.07 ICr95%: 1.31–10.67), RME plus use of transpalatal arch (TA) plus extraction of primary canine(s) (EC) (RR = 1.43 ICr95%: 1.09–1.95), EC plus use of cervical pull headgear (RR = 1.38 ICr95%: 1.11–1.79), and EC plus use of TA (RR = 1.36 ICr95%: 1.00–1.9) than for EC. RME was most likely to be considered as the best interceptive treatment. Overall, the certainty of the evidence was considered low due to imprecision and indirectness. In conclusion, no intervention in the mixed dentition stage is the worst choice for PDC.application/pdfengBrazilian oral research. São Paulo. Vol. 36 (2022), p. 1-16, e119Dente impactadoOrtodontia interceptoraMetanálise em redeTooth, impactedOrthodontics, interceptiveNetwork meta-analysisIs there a better interceptive treatment for unerupted palatally displaced canines? : anetwork meta-analysisinfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/otherinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Institucional da UFRGSinstname:Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS)instacron:UFRGSTEXT001200737.pdf.txt001200737.pdf.txtExtracted Texttext/plain55992http://www.lume.ufrgs.br/bitstream/10183/274757/2/001200737.pdf.txt6459f478970d9a92cb02c25abd91193aMD52ORIGINAL001200737.pdfTexto completo (inglês)application/pdf624647http://www.lume.ufrgs.br/bitstream/10183/274757/1/001200737.pdfbac4878412f8a67ac10bd5afa8fedd1cMD5110183/2747572024-04-17 06:35:27.075467oai:www.lume.ufrgs.br:10183/274757Repositório de PublicaçõesPUBhttps://lume.ufrgs.br/oai/requestopendoar:2024-04-17T09:35:27Repositório Institucional da UFRGS - Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS)false |
dc.title.pt_BR.fl_str_mv |
Is there a better interceptive treatment for unerupted palatally displaced canines? : anetwork meta-analysis |
title |
Is there a better interceptive treatment for unerupted palatally displaced canines? : anetwork meta-analysis |
spellingShingle |
Is there a better interceptive treatment for unerupted palatally displaced canines? : anetwork meta-analysis Araújo, Viviane Zis de Dente impactado Ortodontia interceptora Metanálise em rede Tooth, impacted Orthodontics, interceptive Network meta-analysis |
title_short |
Is there a better interceptive treatment for unerupted palatally displaced canines? : anetwork meta-analysis |
title_full |
Is there a better interceptive treatment for unerupted palatally displaced canines? : anetwork meta-analysis |
title_fullStr |
Is there a better interceptive treatment for unerupted palatally displaced canines? : anetwork meta-analysis |
title_full_unstemmed |
Is there a better interceptive treatment for unerupted palatally displaced canines? : anetwork meta-analysis |
title_sort |
Is there a better interceptive treatment for unerupted palatally displaced canines? : anetwork meta-analysis |
author |
Araújo, Viviane Zis de |
author_facet |
Araújo, Viviane Zis de Heckmann, Sani Silva Araujo, Fernando Borba de Ziegelmann, Patricia Klarmann Lenzi, Tathiane Larissa Casagrande, Luciano Araújo, Eustáquio Afonso Marques, Leandro Silva |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Heckmann, Sani Silva Araujo, Fernando Borba de Ziegelmann, Patricia Klarmann Lenzi, Tathiane Larissa Casagrande, Luciano Araújo, Eustáquio Afonso Marques, Leandro Silva |
author2_role |
author author author author author author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Araújo, Viviane Zis de Heckmann, Sani Silva Araujo, Fernando Borba de Ziegelmann, Patricia Klarmann Lenzi, Tathiane Larissa Casagrande, Luciano Araújo, Eustáquio Afonso Marques, Leandro Silva |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Dente impactado Ortodontia interceptora Metanálise em rede |
topic |
Dente impactado Ortodontia interceptora Metanálise em rede Tooth, impacted Orthodontics, interceptive Network meta-analysis |
dc.subject.eng.fl_str_mv |
Tooth, impacted Orthodontics, interceptive Network meta-analysis |
description |
This systematic review aimed to investigate if there is a better interceptive treatment for palatally displaced canines (PDC) in the mixed dentition stage. The PubMed/MEDLINE, CENTRAL, Scopus, and EMBASE databases were searched for randomized clinical trials related to the research topic. The gray literature and reference lists were also assessed. Network meta-analysis was conducted to analyze the effects of different approaches on PDC eruption. The surface under the cumulative ranking area was calculated to rank the treatments. The certainty of the evidence was evaluated using the GRADE approach. Of the 892 eligible studies, 18 were selected for full-text analysis and 9 for meta-analysis, involving 506 participants and 730 PDC, to compare 9 approaches. The proportion of erupted PDC was significantly higher for all interceptive treatments compared with control (no intervention). Furthermore, the proportion of erupted PDC was higher in patients subjected to rapid maxillary expansion (RME) than those who underwent double extraction of primary canine and primary molar (relative risk (RR) = 2.68 ICr95%: 1.12–9.35). A higher proportion of erupted PDC was found for RME (RR = 3.07 ICr95%: 1.31–10.67), RME plus use of transpalatal arch (TA) plus extraction of primary canine(s) (EC) (RR = 1.43 ICr95%: 1.09–1.95), EC plus use of cervical pull headgear (RR = 1.38 ICr95%: 1.11–1.79), and EC plus use of TA (RR = 1.36 ICr95%: 1.00–1.9) than for EC. RME was most likely to be considered as the best interceptive treatment. Overall, the certainty of the evidence was considered low due to imprecision and indirectness. In conclusion, no intervention in the mixed dentition stage is the worst choice for PDC. |
publishDate |
2022 |
dc.date.issued.fl_str_mv |
2022 |
dc.date.accessioned.fl_str_mv |
2024-04-16T06:36:07Z |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/other |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://hdl.handle.net/10183/274757 |
dc.identifier.issn.pt_BR.fl_str_mv |
1806-8324 |
dc.identifier.nrb.pt_BR.fl_str_mv |
001200737 |
identifier_str_mv |
1806-8324 001200737 |
url |
http://hdl.handle.net/10183/274757 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.ispartof.pt_BR.fl_str_mv |
Brazilian oral research. São Paulo. Vol. 36 (2022), p. 1-16, e119 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:Repositório Institucional da UFRGS instname:Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS) instacron:UFRGS |
instname_str |
Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS) |
instacron_str |
UFRGS |
institution |
UFRGS |
reponame_str |
Repositório Institucional da UFRGS |
collection |
Repositório Institucional da UFRGS |
bitstream.url.fl_str_mv |
http://www.lume.ufrgs.br/bitstream/10183/274757/2/001200737.pdf.txt http://www.lume.ufrgs.br/bitstream/10183/274757/1/001200737.pdf |
bitstream.checksum.fl_str_mv |
6459f478970d9a92cb02c25abd91193a bac4878412f8a67ac10bd5afa8fedd1c |
bitstream.checksumAlgorithm.fl_str_mv |
MD5 MD5 |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositório Institucional da UFRGS - Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
|
_version_ |
1801225115927576576 |