Soft tissue changes following the extraction of premolars in nongrowing patients with bimaxillary protrusion. A systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To quantify the amount of perioral tissue changes following the extraction of four premolars in patients with bimaxillary protrusion who had nearly completed active growth. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A literature search was conducted to identify clinical trials that assessed cephalometric perioral soft tissue changes in patients affected by biprotrusion and treated with extractions. Electronic databases (PubMed, ISI WoS Science Citation Index Expanded, and HubMed) were searched. Abstracts that appeared to fulfill the initial selection criteria were selected, and the full-text original articles were retrieved and analyzed. Only articles that fulfilled the final selection criteria were finally considered. Their references were also hand-searched for possible missing articles from the database searches. RESULTS: Nine abstracts met the initial inclusion criteria and these articles were retrieved. From these, five were later rejected mostly because the sample dealt with growing subjects. Four articles remained and they showed that the upper and lower lips retracted and the nasolabial angle increased following premolar extraction. Upper lip retraction ranged from 2 mm to 3.2 mm, lower lip retraction ranged from 2 mm to 4.5 mm. CONCLUSIONS: The lip procumbency improves following the extraction of four premolars and this improvement is predictable. However, the changes are small and do not dramatically modify the profile. A "dished in" profile is not to be expected. Individual variation in response is large.

Landmark identification error in posteroanterior cephalometric radiography. A systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the reliability of landmark identification in posteroanterior cephalometrics. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A literature search was conducted to identify all articles concerning landmark identification error in the frontal radiograph. Electronic databases (PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Database, PubMed Central, and HubMed) were searched. Abstracts that appeared to fulfill the initial selection criteria were selected, and the full-text original articles were then retrieved and analyzed. Only articles that fulfilled the initial selection criteria were finally considered. Their references were also hand searched for possible missing articles from the database searches. RESULTS: Twelve abstracts met the initial inclusion criteria, and these articles were retrieved. From these, eight were immediately rejected because of methodological issues. Only the four articles remaining seemed to fulfill the selection criteria, but two articles were later rejected, one because no landmark identification error mean values were provided and the other because of the sample. Only one article fulfilled the inclusion and exclusion criteria of this study. Midline landmarks were more reproducible than bilateral skeletal landmarks. CONCLUSION: Only one study fulfilled the additional inclusion and exclusion criteria. Few studies exist about the random error in localization of landmarks in posteroanterior cephalograms, and several methodological issues affected these few studies. Thus, future well-designed studies are needed to allow the orthodontist to choose the most appropriate cephalometric analysis.