Dept. of Orthodontics, Hospital of Stomatology, Jilin University, Changchun 130021, China.
Hua Xi Kou Qiang Yi Xue Za Zhi. 2023 Jun 1;41(3):305-314. doi: 10.7518/hxkq.2023.2022453.
This study aimed to conduct a meta-analysis of the efficacy of mandibular advance clear alig-ners with traditional functional appliances as the control group.
PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, China Biomedical Abstracts Database, China Knowledge Network Database, Wanfang Database, and Weipu Database were used in this study. The two groups of researchers screened the literature and extracted data based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria established by PICOS entries, and used the ROBINS-I scale for quality evaluation. Revman 5.4 and Stata 17.0 software were used for meta-analysis.
Nine clinical controlled trials were included in this study with a total sample size of 283 cases. No significant difference was found in SNA, SNB, ANB, Go-Pog, U1-SN, Overjet, and other aspects between the invisible group and the traditional group in the treatment of skeletal class Ⅱ ma-locclusion patients; there was a 0.90° difference in mandibular plane angle between the two groups; the growth of the mandibular ramus (Co-Go) in the traditional group was 1.10 mm more than that in the invisible group; the lip inclination of the lower teeth in the invisible group was better controlled, 1.94° less than that in the control group.
The invisible group can better control the lip inclination of the mandibular anterior teeth when guiding the mandible. Furthermore, the mandibular plane angle (MP-SN) can remain unchanged, but the growth of the mandibular ramus is not as good as the traditional group, and auxiliary measures should be taken to improve it in clinical practice.
本研究旨在对下颌前伸式透明牙套与传统功能矫治器作为对照组的疗效进行荟萃分析。
本研究检索了 PubMed、Web of Science、Embase、Cochrane 图书馆、中国生物医学文献数据库、中国知网数据库、万方数据库和维普数据库。两组研究人员根据 PICOS 条目建立的纳入和排除标准筛选文献并提取数据,并使用 ROBINS-I 量表进行质量评价。使用 Revman 5.4 和 Stata 17.0 软件进行荟萃分析。
本研究纳入了 9 项临床对照试验,总样本量为 283 例。在治疗骨骼Ⅱ类错(牙合)患者方面,隐形组与传统组在 SNA、SNB、ANB、Go-Pog、U1-SN、覆(牙合)等方面无显著差异;两组下颌平面角相差 0.90°;传统组下颌升支(Co-Go)的生长比隐形组多 1.10mm;隐形组对下颌前牙唇倾的控制更好,比对照组少 1.94°。
隐形组在引导下颌运动时能更好地控制下颌前牙的唇倾。此外,下颌平面角(MP-SN)可以保持不变,但下颌升支的生长不如传统组,在临床实践中应采取辅助措施加以改善。