Nam Hye Jin, Flores-Mir Carlos, Major Paul W, Heo Giseon, Kim Justin, Lagravère Manuel O
School of Dentistry, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Alberta, ECHA 5-524, 11405, 87th avenue, Edmonton, Alberta T6G 1C9, Canada.
School of Dentistry, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Alberta, ECHA 5-524, 11405, 87th avenue, Edmonton, Alberta T6G 1C9, Canada.
Int Orthod. 2019 Dec;17(4):621-633. doi: 10.1016/j.ortho.2019.08.001. Epub 2019 Aug 29.
To compare the skeletal and dentoalveolar changes produced by the Damon system's treatment philosophy to traditional orthodontic treatment techniques.
An electronic search in four major databases was completed: Cochrane, PubMed, EMBASE, and Google Beta Scholar on October 5th, 2018. Randomized controlled trials, prospective and retrospective controlled clinical trials were included in this systematic review. The quality assessment of individual studies was done using two different tools: The Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool (RTCs) and The Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) (non-RCTs).
Seven studies were included for this qualitative analysis. Six studies compared the Damon system to various types of conventional (non self-ligating bracket) system as a comparison group. One study used a quad helix as a comparison for a few months before a full bonding appointment with conventional brackets. The majority of studies found an increase in maxillary inter-canine, inter-premolar, and intermolar distance after the treatment in both the Damon and comparison groups. Yet, all studies concluded that there is no significant difference in the final transverse dimension between the two groups. One study also found that the transverse expansion was achieved mainly by tipping movement of posterior dentition, and a decrease in the posterior buccal bone area was evident in both groups after treatment.
There is not enough evidence to support the claim that the Damon system allows additional arch expansion with better tipping control than with traditional techniques.
比较Damon系统的治疗理念与传统正畸治疗技术所产生的骨骼和牙牙槽变化。
于2018年10月5日在四个主要数据库（Cochrane、PubMed、EMBASE和谷歌学术搜索）中完成电子检索。本系统评价纳入随机对照试验、前瞻性和回顾性对照临床试验。使用两种不同工具对个体研究进行质量评估：Cochrane偏倚风险评估工具（RTCs）和非随机研究方法学指数（MINORS）（非随机对照试验）。
七项研究纳入本定性分析。六项研究将Damon系统与各种类型的传统（非自锁托槽）系统作为对照组进行比较。一项研究在全面粘结传统托槽前几个月使用四圈簧作为对照。大多数研究发现，在Damon组和对照组治疗后，上颌尖牙间、前磨牙间和磨牙间距离均增加。然而，所有研究均得出两组最终横向尺寸无显著差异的结论。一项研究还发现，横向扩展主要通过后牙的倾斜移动实现，且两组治疗后颊侧后牙骨面积均明显减小。
没有足够证据支持Damon系统比传统技术能更好地控制倾斜并实现额外牙弓扩展的说法。
