期刊
JOURNAL OF EVIDENCE-BASED DENTAL PRACTICE
卷 20, 期 2, 页码 -出版社
ELSEVIER INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jebdp.2020.101401
关键词
Orthodontic implant; Traditional anchorage; Tooth movement; Anchorage ioss; Evidence-based orthodontics
Objective To compare the clinical effectiveness of mini-implants (MIs) and conventional anchorage appliances used for orthodontic anchorage reinforcement in patients with class I or II malocclusion with bimaxillary protrusion. Materials and Methods Literature search was conducted through PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane from inception to July 2018. The following Medical Subject Heading terms were used for the search string: skeletal anchorage, temporary anchorage devices, miniscrew implant, mini-implant, micro-implant Standardized mean difference (SMD) and 95% confidence interval (CI) of horizontal and vertical movements of teeth from baseline were used for comparison. Results A total of 12 studies were included in the final analysis. MI group significantly lowered mesial movement of molars compared to conventional anchorage group (SMD = -1.48, 95% CI = -2.25 to -0.72; P = .0002). There was significantly higher retraction of incisors in the MI group than in the conventional group (SMD = -0.47 mm, 95% CI = -0.87 to -0.07; P = .02). No significant difference was seen in vertical movement of molars (SMD = -0.21 mm, 95% CI = -0.87 to 0.45; P = .52) and incisors (SMD = -0.30, 95% CI = -1.18 to 0.58; P = .5). Conclusion MIs seem to be more effective than the conventional anchorage devices in terms of minimizing unintended mesial movement of molars with maximum retraction of anterior teeth.
作者
我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。
推荐
暂无数据