Abu Arqub Sarah, Gandhi Vaibhav, Iverson Marissa G, Alam Mohammad Khursheed, Allareddy Veerasathpurush, Liu Dawei, Yadav Sumit, Mehta Shivam
Clinical Assistant Professor, Department of Orthodontics, University of Florida, FL, USA.
Division of Orthodontics, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY, USA.
Eur J Orthod. 2022 Dec 1;44(6):679-689. doi: 10.1093/ejo/cjac029.
The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate root resorption after maxillary expansion with conventional rapid palatal expansion (RPE) and mini-screw assisted rapid palatal expansion appliances (MARPE) using 2D and 3D radiographic methods and histologic methods of measuring root resorption.
A search of PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL, Web of Science, Global Index Medicus, Dissertations & Theses Global, ClinicalTrials.gov registry, ISRCTN Registry, National Research Register, OpenGrey, and the Trip Database was performed. The studies that had analysed root resorption after RPE or MARPE were selected for the systematic review.
The database research, elimination of duplicate studies, data extraction, and risk of bias were performed by the authors independently and in duplication. This systematic review included prospective studies to evaluate root resorption following RPE after tooth-borne (TB), tooth-tissue borne (TTB), bone-borne (BB), and tooth-bone borne (TBB) expansion appliances.
A total of 13 prospective trials (six randomized clinical trials and seven non-randomized prospective clinical trials) were identified for inclusion in this systematic review. Histological studies revealed that most teeth experience root resorption on the buccal surfaces after maxillary expansion. MARPE designs with BB and TBB expansion appliances were found to lead to reduced volumetric root resorption than conventional RPE using micro-computed tomography. However, one study using cone beam computed tomography showed no difference in the root resorption with MARPE and RPE designs.
Maxillary expansion with RPE can lead to root resorption of maxillary posterior teeth. Root resorption occurs more frequently on buccal surfaces on maxillary posterior teeth. Limited evidence suggests that MARPE may lead to reduced root resorption than RPE.
This systematic review was conducted following the Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews and interventions and reported according to the guidelines of Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. The protocol was registered at PROSPERO database (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/; registration number: PROSPERO CRD42021271181).
本系统评价和荟萃分析旨在采用二维和三维影像学方法以及测量牙根吸收的组织学方法,评估使用传统快速腭扩展器(RPE)和微螺钉辅助快速腭扩展器(MARPE)进行上颌扩展后的牙根吸收情况。
对PubMed/MEDLINE、Scopus、Cochrane对照试验中心注册库、CINAHL、科学网、全球医学索引、学位论文数据库、ClinicalTrials.gov注册库、ISRCTN注册库、国家研究注册库、OpenGrey和Trip数据库进行了检索。选择分析RPE或MARPE后牙根吸收情况的研究进行系统评价。
数据库检索、重复研究的排除、数据提取和偏倚风险评估由作者独立且重复进行。本系统评价纳入了前瞻性研究,以评估牙支持式(TB)、牙组织支持式(TTB)、骨支持式(BB)和牙骨支持式(TBB)扩展器进行RPE后牙根吸收情况。
共确定13项前瞻性试验(6项随机临床试验和7项非随机前瞻性临床试验)纳入本系统评价。组织学研究表明,上颌扩展后大多数牙齿的颊侧表面出现牙根吸收。使用微型计算机断层扫描发现,采用BB和TBB扩展器的MARPE设计比传统RPE导致的牙根体积吸收减少。然而,一项使用锥形束计算机断层扫描的研究显示,MARPE和RPE设计在牙根吸收方面没有差异。
使用RPE进行上颌扩展可导致上颌后牙牙根吸收。上颌后牙牙根吸收更常发生在颊侧表面。有限的证据表明,与RPE相比,MARPE可能导致牙根吸收减少。
本系统评价按照Cochrane系统评价和干预措施手册进行,并根据系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目指南进行报告。方案已在PROSPERO数据库(https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/;注册号:PROSPERO CRD42021271181)注册。