ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: To analyze the scientific literature and compare in the results of conventional orthopedic appliances with those obtained from recent bone-anchored orthopedics for Class III malocclusion. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The literature was systematically reviewed using PubMed/Medline, Scopus, and Scirus databases up to January 2012. Articles were selected by two different researchers (kappa index â=â 0.83), based on established inclusion/exclusion criteria. Methodologic quality was classified as high, medium, or low quality. RESULTS: The search strategy identified 1020 titles. Thirty studies were selected after applying the criteria (high quality â=â 9, medium quality â=â 21). Protraction rates differed within a range of one- to twofold between bone-anchored and dentoalveolar therapies (P < .001). All studies noted the effect of clockwise rotation on the mandible and an increase in inferior-anterior and total facial height; this was more obvious in dentoalveolar therapy than in bone-anchored orthopedics (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Dental parameters like overjet increased significantly with both sets of groups, ranging from 1.7 to 7.9 mm with dentoalveolar therapy and from 2.7 to 7.6 mm with bone-anchored orthopedics.
