Rutili Valentina, Nieri Michele, Franceschi Debora, Pierleoni Felicita, Giuntini Veronica, Franchi Lorenzo
Postgraduate Program in Orthodontics, The University of Florence, Italy.
Department of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, The University of Florence, Italy.
Eur J Orthod. 2023 Mar 31;45(2):157-168. doi: 10.1093/ejo/cjac048.
Skeletally anchored facemask has been proposed to maximize skeletal effects and minimize dental effects in the treatment of Class III malocclusion in growing patients.
To compare the dento-skeletal effects produced by the facemask with or without skeletal anchorage for the treatment of Class III malocclusion in growing patients.
PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science, and OpenGrey were used for the electronic search without language, publication status, and year restrictions. Only RCTs were included. Inclusion criteria were: growing patients (age under 18 years) with Class III malocclusion, with indications for treatment with the facemask. Data were extracted by two independent reviewers. GRADE statement was executed. The mean of differences (MD) and the risk ratio (RR) were used.
Three articles with a total of 123 patients were included. One article was at low risk of bias while two were at high risk of bias. There were no significant differences between the two groups in ANB angle, Wits appraisal, SNB angle, and SN-MP angle. SNA angle was significantly increased in the skeletally anchored facemask (pooled MD = 0.80 favouring skeletal anchorage, 95% CI from 0.29 to 1.31, P = 0.002, I2 = 12 per cent, three studies, GRADE moderate). The U1-SN angle was significantly reduced in the skeletally anchored facemask (pooled MD = -5.91 favouring skeletal anchorage, 95% CI from -7.64 to -4.27, P < 0.00001, I2 = 0 per cent, two studies, GRADE moderate). There were significantly less complications in tooth-anchored facemask (pooled RR = 7.98 favouring dental anchorage, 95 per cent CI from 1.04 to 61.27, P = 0.05, I2 = 0 per cent, two studies, GRADE low).
Few RCTs (three) were included, and two studies were at high risk of bias. There were no long-term RCTs comparing skeletally anchored facemask with dental-anchored facemask. Only Asiatic patients were included in this systematic review.
Skeletally anchored facemask was associated to a greater increase of SNA angle at the end of treatment though clinically not significant. Facemask with skeletal anchorage determined a reduced inclination of maxillary incisors compared to dental-anchored facemask with greater risks of complications.
PROSPERO register (CRD42020221982).
有人提出,在治疗生长发育期Ⅲ类错颌畸形患者时,骨骼锚固式面罩可使骨骼效应最大化,牙齿效应最小化。
比较有或无骨骼锚固的面罩治疗生长发育期Ⅲ类错颌畸形所产生的牙-骨骼效应。
使用PubMed、Cochrane图书馆、Scopus、Embase、科学网和OpenGrey进行电子检索,不受语言、出版状态和年份限制。仅纳入随机对照试验。纳入标准为:生长发育期Ⅲ类错颌畸形患者(年龄在18岁以下),有使用面罩治疗的指征。由两名独立评审员提取数据。执行GRADE声明。使用差异均值(MD)和风险比(RR)。
纳入3篇文章,共123例患者。1篇文章偏倚风险低,2篇偏倚风险高。两组在ANB角、Wits评估、SNB角和SN-MP角方面无显著差异。骨骼锚固式面罩组的SNA角显著增加(合并MD = 0.80,支持骨骼锚固,95%CI为0.29至1.31,P = 0.002,I² = 12%,三项研究,GRADE中等)。骨骼锚固式面罩组的U1-SN角显著减小(合并MD = -5.91,支持骨骼锚固,95%CI为-7.64至-4.27,P < 0.00001,I² = 0%,两项研究,GRADE中等)。牙齿锚固式面罩的并发症显著更少(合并RR = 7.98,支持牙齿锚固,95%CI为1.04至61.27,P = 0.05,I² = 0%,两项研究,GRADE低)。
纳入的随机对照试验较少(3项),两项研究偏倚风险高。没有长期随机对照试验比较骨骼锚固式面罩和牙齿锚固式面罩。本系统评价仅纳入了亚洲患者。
治疗结束时,骨骼锚固式面罩与SNA角更大幅度的增加相关,尽管临床上不显著。与牙齿锚固式面罩相比,骨骼锚固式面罩导致上颌切牙倾斜度减小,但并发症风险更高。
PROSPERO注册库(CRD42020221982)