Minami-Sugaya Hideko, Lentini-Oliveira Débora A, Carvalho Fernando R, Machado Marco Antonio C, Marzola Clóvis, Saconato Humberto, Prado Gilmar F
Neuro-Sono Sleep Center, Department of Neurology, Universidade Federal de São Paulo, Rua Americo Salvador Novelli, 508, Itaquera, São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil, 08210-090.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 May 23;5(5):CD006963. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006963.pub3.
Prominent lower front teeth may be associated with a large or prognathic lower jaw (mandible) or a small or retrusive upper jaw (maxilla). Edward Angle, who may be considered the father of modern orthodontics, classified the malocclusion in this situation as Class III. The individual is described as having a negative or reverse overjet as the lower front teeth are more prominent than the upper front teeth.
The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate different treatments of Angle Class III malocclusion in adults.
The following databases were searched: Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register (to 22 March 2012); CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 1); MEDLINE via OVID (1950 to 22 March 2012); EMBASE via OVID (1980 to 22 March 2012); LILACs (1982 to 22 March 2012); BBO (1986 to 22 March 2012); and SciELO (1997 to 22 March 2012).
All randomized or quasi-randomized controlled trials of treatments for adults with an Angle Class III malocclusion were included.
Three review authors independently assessed the eligibility of the identified reports. Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias in the included studies. The mean differences with 95% confidence intervals were calculated for continuous data.
Two randomized controlled trials were included in this review. There are different types of surgery for this type of malocclusion but only trials of mandible reduction surgery were identified. One trial compared intraoral vertical ramus osteotomy (IVRO) with sagittal split ramus osteotomy (SSRO) and the other trial compared vertical ramus osteotomy (VRO) with and without osteosynthesis. Neither trial found any difference between the two treatments. The trials did not provide adequate data for assessing effectiveness of the techniques described.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient evidence from the two included trials, to conclude that one procedure is better or worse than another. The included trials compared different interventions and were at high risk of bias and therefore no implications for practice can be given. Further high quality randomized controlled trials with long term follow-up are required.
下前牙突出可能与下颌骨大或前突，或上颌骨小或后缩有关。被视为现代正畸学之父的爱德华·安格尔将这种情况下的错颌畸形归类为III类。由于下前牙比上前牙更突出，个体被描述为具有负覆盖或反覆盖。
本系统评价的目的是评估成人安格尔III类错颌畸形的不同治疗方法。
检索了以下数据库：Cochrane口腔健康组试验注册库（至2012年3月22日）；CENTRAL（Cochrane图书馆2012年第1期）；通过OVID检索的MEDLINE（1950年至2012年3月22日）；通过OVID检索的EMBASE（1980年至2012年3月22日）；LILACs（1982年至2012年3月22日）；BBO（1986年至2012年3月22日）；以及SciELO（1997年至2012年3月22日）。
纳入所有针对成人安格尔III类错颌畸形治疗的随机或半随机对照试验。
三位综述作者独立评估所识别报告的合格性。两位综述作者独立提取数据并评估纳入研究的偏倚风险。对连续数据计算95%置信区间的均值差异。
本综述纳入了两项随机对照试验。针对这种错颌畸形有不同类型的手术，但仅识别出下颌骨缩小手术的试验。一项试验比较了口内垂直升支截骨术（IVRO）与矢状劈开升支截骨术（SSRO），另一项试验比较了有或没有骨固定的垂直升支截骨术（VRO）。两项试验均未发现两种治疗方法之间存在任何差异。这些试验未提供足够数据来评估所描述技术的有效性。
纳入的两项试验证据不足，无法得出一种手术比另一种更好或更差的结论。纳入的试验比较了不同干预措施，且存在较高的偏倚风险，因此无法给出对实践的启示。需要进一步开展长期随访的高质量随机对照试验。
