Kolokitha Olga-Elpis, Kaklamanos Eleftherios G, Papadopoulos Moschos A
Department of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece.
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2008 Dec;134(6):722.e1-722.e12; discussion 722-3. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2008.01.013.
In spite of growing concern of routine mechanotherapy modalities in patients' health and recent regulations on nickel exposure, there has been no relevant meta-analysis. The aim of this study, therefore, was to investigate the effect of orthodontic therapy on the prevalence of nickel hypersensitivity and compare it with the prevalence in the general population.
Several electronic databases were searched. Hand-searching was also performed to identify additional relevant studies. Initially, 324 articles were retrieved. After applying specific inclusion criteria, 8 studies were eligible for the meta-analysis. Meta-analysis was performed with Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software (version 2.2.046, Biostat, Englewood, NJ). Evaluations of the validity of the included articles and of publication bias were also performed.
A lack of high-validity longitudinal studies of the prevalence of nickel hypersensitivity in patients before and after orthodontic treatment and in appropriate controls was noted. From the studies retrieved, no statistically significant difference between the odds for a positive patch-test result before orthodontic treatment and after the placement of the appliances was observed. Orthodontic patients with no cutaneous piercing or with skin pierced have no statistically significant differences of nickel hypersensitivity after treatment compared with the general population.
Orthodontic treatment is not associated with an increase in the prevalence of nickel hypersensitivity unless subjects have a history of cutaneous piercing. High-validity studies are needed to produce strong evidence to further support the results of this meta-analysis.
尽管人们日益关注常规机械治疗方式对患者健康的影响，以及近期对镍暴露的相关规定，但尚未有相关的荟萃分析。因此，本研究的目的是调查正畸治疗对镍过敏患病率的影响，并将其与普通人群的患病率进行比较。
检索了多个电子数据库。还进行了手工检索以识别其他相关研究。最初检索到324篇文章。在应用特定的纳入标准后，有8项研究符合荟萃分析的条件。使用综合荟萃分析软件（版本2.2.046，Biostat，新泽西州恩格尔伍德）进行荟萃分析。还对纳入文章的有效性和发表偏倚进行了评估。
注意到缺乏关于正畸治疗前后患者以及适当对照中镍过敏患病率的高有效性纵向研究。从检索到的研究中，未观察到正畸治疗前斑贴试验阳性结果与矫治器放置后阳性结果的几率之间存在统计学上的显著差异。与普通人群相比，未进行皮肤穿刺或进行过皮肤穿刺的正畸患者在治疗后镍过敏方面无统计学显著差异。
正畸治疗与镍过敏患病率的增加无关，除非受试者有皮肤穿刺史。需要高有效性研究来提供有力证据，以进一步支持本荟萃分析的结果。
