The impact of non-extraction orthodontic treatment on oral health-related quality of life: clear aligners versus fixed appliances-a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of clear aligner treatment on oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) compared to fixed appliance treatment. TRIAL DESIGN: Two-arm parallel group single-centre randomized controlled trial. METHODS: Forty-four adult patients (8 males, 36 females) were randomly and equally assigned to either the fixed appliances group (FA) or the clear aligners group (CA). Randomization with an allocation ratio of 1:1 was performed by a researcher who is not involved in the study using a random sample table. Non-extraction cases were included in this study. Outcome measures were the OHRQoL of patients and the duration of orthodontic treatment. The OHRQoL of patients was assessed by the short-form Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-14) at the following assessment times: before the start of treatment (T0), 1 week (T1), 1 month (T2), 3 months (T3), and 6 months (T4) after the start of orthodontic treatment and post-treatment (T5). The assessor was blinded during outcomes assessment and statistical analysis. RESULTS: Two hundred and eighteen patients were evaluated for eligibility, 44 of them fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were randomly allocated to treatment groups. None of the patients was lost to follow-up. Accordingly, the results of 44 patients were statically analysed. The total OHIP-14 score was not statistically different between the FA and the CA groups at T0 (P = 0.91) and T5 (P = 0.16), whereas it was significantly lower in the CA group as compared to the FA group at T1 (mean difference [MD] = 11.04, 95% CI 8.7 to 13.42, P < 0.001), T2 (MD = 6.00, 95% CI: 4.3 to 7.7, P < 0.001), T3 (MD = 3.37, 95% CI: 1.5 to 5, P < 0.01), and T4 (MD = 3.32, 95% CI: 1.7 to 4.9, P < 0.001). Treatment duration in the CA group was significantly shorter than in the FA group (MD = 4.18, 95% CI: 2.8 to 5.5, P < 0.001). No harms were observed. LIMITATIONS: The results were limited to the non-extraction treatment of mild to moderate crowding cases. CONCLUSIONS: Patients treated with clear aligners reported higher OHRQoL and shorter treatment duration as compared to those treated with fixed appliances. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Retrospectively registered (DRKS-ID: DRKS00023977).

Evaluation of piezocision and laser-assisted flapless corticotomy in the acceleration of canine retraction: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the effectiveness of two minimally invasive surgical procedures in the acceleration of canine retraction: piezocision and laser-assisted flapless corticotomy (LAFC). METHODS: Trial design: A single-centre randomized controlled trial with a compound design (two-arm parallel-group design and a split-mouth design for each arm). PARTICIPANTS: 36 Class II division I patients (12 males, 24 females; age range: 15 to 27 years) requiring first upper premolars extraction followed by canine retraction. INTERVENTIONS: piezocision group (PG; n = 18) and laser-assisted flapless corticotomy group (LG; n = 18). A split-mouth design was applied for each group where the flapless surgical intervention was randomly allocated to one side and the other side served as a control side. OUTCOMES: the rate of canine retraction (primary outcome), anchorage loss and canine rotation, which were assessed at 1, 2, 3 and 4 months following the onset of canine retraction. Also the duration of canine retraction was recorded. Random sequence: Computer-generated random numbers. Allocation concealment: sequentially numbered, opaque, sealed envelopes. Blinding: Single blinded (outcomes' assessor). RESULTS: Seventeen patients in each group were enrolled in the statistical analysis. The rate of canine retraction was significantly greater in the experimental side than in the control side in both groups by two-fold in the first month and 1.5-fold in the second month (p < 0.001). Also the overall canine retraction duration was significantly reduced in the experimental side as compared with control side in both groups about 25% (p ≤ 0.001). There were no significant differences between the experimental and the control sides regarding loss of anchorage and upper canine rotation in both groups (p > 0.05). There were no significant differences between the two flapless techniques regarding the studied variables during all evaluation times (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Piezocision and laser-assisted flapless corticotomy appeared to be effective treatment methods for accelerating canine retraction without any significant untoward effect on anchorage or canine rotation during rapid retraction. TRIALS REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT02606331 ).

Effectiveness of minimally invasive surgical procedures in the acceleration of tooth movement: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to assess systematically the available scientific evidence relating the efficiency of minimally invasive surgical procedures in accelerating orthodontic tooth movement and the adverse effects associated with these procedures. METHODS: Electronic search of these databases CENTRAL, EMBASE, Scopus, PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar Beta, Trip, OpenGrey and PQDT OPEN was performed (last updated January 2016). The reference lists of the included studies were hand searched. Unpublished literature and ongoing studies were also checked electronically through ClinicalTrials.gov and (ICTRP). Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with patients who received minimally invasive surgical procedures combined with fixed orthodontic appliances compared with conventional treatment were included. Cochrane's risk of bias tool was used to assess risk of bias. RESULTS: Four RCTs (61 patients) and nine ongoing protocols were included in this review. Only three RCTs were suitable for quantitative synthesis. Higher tooth movement rate was found with the minimally invasive surgical procedures by a weighted mean difference of 0.65 mm for 1 month of canine retraction (WMD = 0.65: 95 % CI (0.54, 0.76), p < 0.001) and by a weighted mean difference 1.41 mm for 2 months (WMD = 1.41: 95 % CI (0.81, 2.01), p < 0.001). No adverse effects associated with these procedures were reported. CONCLUSIONS: There is limited available evidence about the effectiveness of minimally invasive surgically accelerated orthodontics (MISAO). Although the current review indicated that MISAO can help in accelerating canine retraction, further research in this domain should be performed before it can be recommended in everyday clinical practice.