Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Evaluation of Aligners and Root Resorption: An Overview of Systematic Reviews.
Zhang, Meiling; Zhang, Peng; Koh, Jeong-Tae; Oh, Min-Hee; Cho, Jin-Hyoung.
Afiliación
  • Zhang M; Department of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, Chonnam National University, Gwangju 61186, Republic of Korea.
  • Zhang P; Department of Prosthodontics, School of Dentistry, Chonnam National University, Gwangju 61186, Republic of Korea.
  • Koh JT; Department of Pharmacology and Dental Therapeutics, Hard-Tissue Biointerface Research Center, School of Dentistry, Dental Science Research Institute, Chonnam National University, Gwangju 61186, Republic of Korea.
  • Oh MH; Department of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, Dental 4D Research Institute, Dental Science Research Institute, Chonnam National University, Gwangju 61186, Republic of Korea.
  • Cho JH; Department of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, Dental 4D Research Institute, Dental Science Research Institute, Chonnam National University, Gwangju 61186, Republic of Korea.
J Clin Med ; 13(7)2024 Mar 27.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38610714
ABSTRACT

Background:

To evaluate the current evidence on clear aligners and root resorption using 3D and/or combined 2D and 3D methods from available systematic reviews and meta-analyses and to determine the relationship between root resorption and clear aligners using the AMSTAR 2 tool.

Methods:

A comprehensive literature search of systematic reviews investigating aligners and root resorption, published up until 31 December 2022, was conducted. The following electronic databases were searched MEDLINE via PubMed, EMBASE, Google Scholar, Science Direct, Web of Science, Scopus, LIVIVO, and LILACS. There were no language restrictions. The inclusion criteria were restricted to studies focusing on root resorption utilizing either 3D methods exclusively or a combination of 2D and 3D techniques. Data were screened and analyzed for quality using the "A Measurement Tool to Assess Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR 2)" tool. Data extraction was conducted independently by two authors. The gathered information was categorized and synthesized narratively based on the primary findings elucidated within the reviews.

Results:

Out of a total of 1221 potentially eligible studies initially identified, 4 systematic reviews met the inclusion criteria following the exclusion of irrelevant studies. Among these, two systematic reviews (50%) were classified as low-quality, while the remaining two (50%) were deemed to be of critically low quality.

Conclusions:

Based on the findings of four systematic reviews, the root resorption rate was lower with the use of clear aligners than with fixed aligners. It is advisable to approach the interpretation of this conclusion with caution, as the quality of the available evidence is assessed to be very low. Higher quality systematic reviews are needed to substantiate this conclusion.
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Bases de datos: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: J Clin Med Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Bases de datos: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: J Clin Med Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article