Chen Christopher Liang-Cheng, Wang Shao-Yu, Tsai Min-Jia, Huang Tsai-Wei
Division of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Dental Department, Changhua Christian Hospital, Changhua, Taiwan.
Dental Department, Changhua Christian Hospital, Changhua, Taiwan.
J Orofac Orthop. 2025 Jul 15. doi: 10.1007/s00056-025-00601-1.
Orthodontic treatment offers numerous benefits, but prolonged treatment times can lead to increased costs and sequelae. Piezoelectric-assisted procedures like piezocision show promise in accelerating treatment, though their efficacy is not yet fully confirmed, nor are they widely adopted. This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of piezocision for orthodontic patients.
A meta-analysis of 16 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving 371 patients was conducted to compare piezocision with conventional orthodontic treatment. Systematic searches were performed in PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases. Statistical analyses included mean difference (MD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using a random-effects model. The study protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022335350).
Piezocision significantly reduced treatment duration compared to conventional methods (MD = -39.60, 95% CI -59.67 to -19.52), though total treatment time was investigated by only one research group. Posttreatment pain was significantly higher in the piezocision group on day 1 (MD = 17.83, 95% CI 5.75-29.92) but showed no significant differences on day 7 (MD = 4.86, 95% CI -0.74 to 10.47). Despite similar pain levels by day 7, patients expressed preferences for conventional orthodontic treatment. The reduction rate of Little's irregularity index was more efficient in the piezocision group during the first month (MD = 1.58, 95% CI -0.13 to 3.29), with no significant differences at the end of alignment (MD = 1.04, 95% CI -0.06 to 2.15).
Piezocision resulted in reduced orthodontic treatment duration compared to conventional methods. However, considering the study limitations and patient preferences, future research with larger sample sizes and more RCTs is needed to validate these findings and assess the long-term clinical implications before widespread adoption.
正畸治疗有诸多益处,但治疗时间延长会导致成本增加和出现后遗症。像压电切开术这样的压电辅助程序在加速治疗方面显示出前景,不过其疗效尚未得到充分证实,也未被广泛采用。本研究旨在评估压电切开术对正畸患者的有效性。
对16项涉及371例患者的随机对照试验(RCT)进行荟萃分析,以比较压电切开术与传统正畸治疗。在PubMed、EMBASE和Cochrane图书馆数据库中进行了系统检索。统计分析包括使用随机效应模型的平均差(MD)及95%置信区间(CI)。该研究方案已在PROSPERO(CRD42022335350)中注册。
与传统方法相比,压电切开术显著缩短了治疗时间(MD = -39.60,95% CI -59.67至-19.52),不过仅一个研究组对总治疗时间进行了调查。压电切开术组在第1天的治疗后疼痛显著更高(MD = 17.83,95% CI 5.75 - 29.92),但在第7天无显著差异(MD = 4.86,95% CI -0.74至10.47)。尽管到第7天疼痛水平相似,但患者表示更倾向于传统正畸治疗。在第一个月,压电切开术组的Little不规则指数降低率更高(MD = 1.58,95% CI -0.13至3.29),在排齐结束时无显著差异(MD = 1.04,95% CI -0.06至2.15)。
与传统方法相比,压电切开术缩短了正畸治疗时间。然而,考虑到研究局限性和患者偏好,需要开展更大样本量和更多随机对照试验的未来研究来验证这些发现,并在广泛应用前评估其长期临床意义。