Marya Anand, Porntaveetus Thantrira, Okazaki Katsushi, Jamilian Abdolreza
Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Puthisastra, Phnom Penh, Cambodia.
The City of London Dental School, University of Greater Manchester, London, UK.
Evid Based Dent. 2025 Jun 14. doi: 10.1038/s41432-025-01173-0.
Lucchese A, Marcolina M, Mancini N et al. A comparison of the alterations of oral microbiome with fixed orthodontic therapy and clear aligners: a systematic review. J Oral Microbiol 2025; 17: 2372751.
The review searched multiple electronic databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, Ovid, Dentistry and Oral Sciences Source) and gray literature (OpenGray) up to May 30, 2023.
The selection of the studies was processed according to PRISMA guidelines. Two reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts, with disagreements resolved by a third reviewer. Full-text articles were then assessed for eligibility based on pre-defined inclusion/exclusion criteria (RCTs, nRCTs, cohort studies; at least two time points for analysis; minimum 10 patients; clear aligners vs. fixed appliances or comparison between them; patients with good systemic health not taking medications).
Data extraction from the included studies was carried out by two reviewers in consultation with a third reviewer to define the variables for extraction and resolve any disagreements. Extracted data included study characteristics (author, year, design, sample size, patient age), intervention details, sample collection methods (saliva, plaque), microbial analysis methods (16S rRNA sequencing, PCR, BANA test), and microbiological outcomes. A qualitative synthesis was performed due to the heterogeneity of the included studies, precluding meta-analysis.
A total of 484 articles were identified, with 9 studies that met the inclusion and exclusion criteria: eight non-randomized controlled trials and one randomized controlled trial. Sample sizes ranged from 10 to 77 participants. Various microbial analysis methods were employed, including 16S rRNA gene sequencing (5 studies), PCR (3 studies), and the BANA test (1 study). Following the application of rating scales, 1 article was classified as having a low risk of bias, 6 as having a moderate risk, and 2 as having a serious risk of bias.
The review suggests that clear aligners may be associated with a less detrimental impact on the oral microbiome compared to fixed appliances, possibly due to improved oral hygiene. Both therapies alter the oral microbiome; however, the changes caused by aligners are more conducive to better oral health compared to fixed appliances.
卢切塞A、马尔科利纳M、曼奇尼N等。固定正畸治疗与透明矫治器对口腔微生物群改变的比较:一项系统评价。《口腔微生物学杂志》2025年;17: 2372751。
该评价检索了多个电子数据库(PubMed、Cochrane图书馆、Embase、Web of Science、Scopus、Ovid、牙科学与口腔科学来源数据库)以及截至2023年5月30日的灰色文献(OpenGray)。
研究选择按照PRISMA指南进行。两名评审员独立筛选标题和摘要,如有分歧则由第三名评审员解决。然后根据预先定义的纳入/排除标准(随机对照试验、非随机对照试验、队列研究;至少两个分析时间点;至少10名患者;透明矫治器与固定矫治器或两者之间的比较;全身健康状况良好且未服用药物的患者)评估全文文章的 eligibility。
由两名评审员在第三名评审员的参与下从纳入研究中提取数据,以确定提取变量并解决任何分歧。提取的数据包括研究特征(作者、年份、设计、样本量、患者年龄)、干预细节、样本收集方法(唾液、牙菌斑)、微生物分析方法(16S rRNA测序、聚合酶链反应、BANA试验)以及微生物学结果。由于纳入研究的异质性,进行了定性综合分析,排除了荟萃分析。
共识别出484篇文章,其中9项研究符合纳入和排除标准:8项非随机对照试验和1项随机对照试验。样本量从10至77名参与者不等。采用了多种微生物分析方法,包括16S rRNA基因测序(5项研究)、聚合酶链反应(3项研究)和BANA试验(1项研究)。应用评分量表后,1篇文章被归类为偏倚风险低,6篇为中度风险,2篇为严重偏倚风险。
该评价表明,与固定矫治器相比,透明矫治器可能对口腔微生物群的有害影响较小,这可能是由于口腔卫生得到改善。两种治疗方法都会改变口腔微生物群;然而,与固定矫治器相比,矫治器引起的变化更有利于口腔健康。