ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: This study aims to systematically review and identify the changes of occlusion in patients after orthognathic surgery. METHODS: The protocol was developed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) and was registered to the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) under the registration number CRD42021253129. Studies included were Original articles only, Additionally, studies were included if the outcome of occlusal force was measured pre- and postoperatively and if occlusal forces resulted from a long follow-up of a minimum of 1 year following orthognathic surgery using adequate measurement tools. Non-English articles, case reports, case series, and non-original articles, including systematic reviews and literature reviews, were excluded. RESULTS: The search strategy yielded a total of 978 articles. Of the 978 articles, 285 were duplicates. After reading the titles and abstracts, 649 articles were excluded, and full-text articles of the remaining 47 studies were reviewed independently by two authors for eligibility wherein 33 articles were excluded, because they did not meet the inclusion criteria. Finally, a total of 14 studies were processed for critical review. CONCLUSION: The occlusal force increased after orthognathic surgery, although not to the level of the control group; however, the maximal bite force remained unchanged. Immediately after orthognathic surgery, chewing and swallowing forces increased. Significant reductions in the postoperative occlusal contact pressure areas was also observed.
Subject(s)
Orthognathic Surgery , Orthognathic Surgical Procedures , Humans , Systematic Reviews as Topic , Meta-Analysis as Topic , Dental OcclusionABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To systemically review all clinical trials that evaluate the effectiveness of orthodontic intrusion using bone anchorage devices versus using other orthodontic techniques in adult patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS: All randomized, controlled clinical trials and prospective studies that compare the use of TADs in intrusion versus alternative devices from the year 2000 to 2019 were searched using various electronic databases. Databases used include Pubmed, Cochrane, Scopus, Lilacs, and ScienceDirect. Selection was initially made by reading the titles and abstracts of potential suitable studies. The final selection was made after reading the full retrieved articles. A methodological score developed by Lagravère was used to assess the quality of evidence. The selection process was illustrated using a PRISMA flow chart. RESULTS: A total of 3942 articles were retrieved, from which only two randomized clinical trials met the inclusion criteria. This presented a low to medium level of evidence to support the hypothesis that TADs are more effective than other orthodontic intrusion techniques for intruding upper incisors and improving upper incisor to lip relation while eliminating the adverse effect of compromising vertical posterior anchorage. Shorter treatment times and less root resorption were found in the TAD group. CONCLUSION: There is insufficient evidence to state that TADs can be used as orthodontic anchorage to effectively intrude the incisors without the need for patient cooperation. Future high quality prospective randomized clinical trials are required.
