Suppr超能文献

接受正畸治疗患者使用无托槽和传统粘结陶瓷托槽的系统评价与荟萃分析

Flash-free and conventional adhesive ceramic brackets in patients undergoing orthodontic treatment: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

作者信息

Daraqel Baraa, Yingying Tang, Zheng Leilei

机构信息

Department of Orthodontics, Stomatological Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China.

Chongqing Key Laboratory of Oral Disease and Biomedical Sciences, Chongqing, China.

出版信息

Orthod Craniofac Res. 2023 Feb;26(1):1-12. doi: 10.1111/ocr.12585. Epub 2022 May 10.

Abstract

To investigate whether flash-free adhesive ceramic brackets (FFA) have a better clinical performance than conventional adhesive ceramic brackets (CVA) in patients undergoing multi-bracket orthodontic treatment. PubMed, CENTRAL, Web of Science, Scopus, Embase, CNKI and Grey-literature were searched without restrictions up to January 2022. Both randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs) were included. Risk of bias assessment was performed using the RoB 2.0 and ROBINS-I cochrane risk of bias tools. Eight articles, for seven studies, were included in this systematic review, and four split-mouth trials (SMT) were included in the meta-analysis. A random-effects meta-analysis found a statistically significant faster bonding time with FFA (mean difference [MD] = -93.85 seconds/quadrant, P = .002, 2 SMT), and no statistically significant difference regarding bracket failure rate at 6 months (risk ratio [RR] = 1.05; P = .93, 3 SMT), adhesive removal time (MD = -18.26 seconds/quadrant, P = .50, 2 SMT), and amount of remnant adhesive (MD = -0.13/bracket, P = .72, 2 SMT) between FFA and CVA. No difference (P > .05, 3 SMT) was found in enamel demineralization and periodontal measurements. CVA showed a statistically significant higher debonding pain score (P = .004, 1 SMT). Both flash-free and conventional adhesive ceramic brackets had a similar clinical performance, except for the faster bonding with FFA. Further, well-designed clinical trials are still required.

摘要

为研究在接受多托槽正畸治疗的患者中,免闪光粘结陶瓷托槽(FFA)是否比传统粘结陶瓷托槽(CVA)具有更好的临床性能。检索了截至2022年1月的PubMed、CENTRAL、Web of Science、Scopus、Embase、中国知网和灰色文献,无检索限制。纳入随机对照试验(RCT)和对照临床试验(CCT)。使用RoB 2.0和ROBINS - I Cochrane偏倚风险工具进行偏倚风险评估。本系统评价纳入了8篇文章,涉及7项研究,荟萃分析纳入了4项双侧对照试验(SMT)。随机效应荟萃分析发现,FFA的粘结时间在统计学上显著更快(平均差[MD]= -93.85秒/象限,P = 0.002,2项SMT),在6个月时托槽脱落率(风险比[RR]= 1.05;P = 0.93,3项SMT)、粘结剂去除时间(MD = -18.26秒/象限,P = 0.50,2项SMT)和残留粘结剂量(MD = -0.13/托槽,P = 0.72,2项SMT)方面,FFA与CVA之间无统计学显著差异。在釉质脱矿和牙周测量方面未发现差异(P>0.05,3项SMT)。CVA的脱粘结疼痛评分在统计学上显著更高(P = 0.004,1项SMT)。除了FFA粘结更快外,免闪光粘结和传统粘结陶瓷托槽具有相似的临床性能。此外,仍需要设计良好的临床试验。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验