Temporomandibular joint disc position and shape in patients submitted to two protocols of rapid maxillary expansion and face mask therapy: A randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this prospective study was to assess possible changes in the position and shape of the temporomandibular joint (TMJ) articular disc in patients treated with two protocols of rapid maxillary expansion (RME) and face mask (FM) therapy.

METHODS

A sample of 88 patients with Class III or Class III subdivision malocclusions, aged between 6 and 13 years, were consecutively selected and divided into three groups (G): G1-34 patients were treated with RME, followed by FM therapy; G2-34 patients were treated using RME according to modified alternate rapid maxillary expansion and constriction (ALT-RAMEC) protocol, followed by FM therapy. These treated groups were randomly (1:1 allocation ratio) distributed according to the two treatment protocols. G3 - Control Group - 20 untreated patients were followed. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) TMJs were obtained before (T1) and after (T2) a treatment period or follow-up. McNemar test, Fisher's exact test and intra- and inter-observer concordance (K) were performed (p ≤ .05).

RESULTS

There were no statistically significant differences in the baseline cephalometric variables at T1 between the groups. There were statistically significant differences between the groups (p < .001) in relation to the disc shape in T1, since G1 (8 TMJs -11.76%) presented higher occurrences of altered forms in comparison with G2 (no changes). No significant differences were observed in disc position CM and OM (G1 - p > .999; G2 - p = .063; G3 - p = .500) and shape (G1 - p > 0.999; G2 - p = .250; G3 - not calculable), between T1 × T2, in any of the groups studied.

CONCLUSION

The two treatment protocols did not have adverse effects on the position and shape of the TMJ disc, in a short-term evaluation.

Orthodontic treatment for prominent lower front teeth (Class III malocclusion) in children

BACKGROUND

Prominent lower front teeth (Class III malocclusion) may be due to jaw or tooth position or both. The upper jaw (maxilla) can be too far back or the lower jaw (mandible) too far forward; the upper front teeth (incisors) may be tipped back or the lower front teeth tipped forwards. Orthodontic treatment uses different types of braces (appliances) fitted inside or outside the mouth (or both) and fixed to the teeth. A facemask is the most commonly reported non-surgical intervention used to correct Class III malocclusion. The facemask rests on the forehead and chin, and is connected to the upper teeth via an expansion appliance (known as 'rapid maxillary expansion' (RME)). Using elastic bands placed by the wearer, a force is applied to the top teeth and jaw to pull them forwards and downward. Some orthodontic interventions involve a surgical component; these go through the gum into the bone (e.g. miniplates). In severe cases, or if orthodontic treatment is unsuccessful, people may need jaw (orthognathic) surgery as adults. This review updates one published in 2013.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of orthodontic treatment for prominent lower front teeth in children and adolescents.

SEARCH METHODS

An information specialist searched four bibliographic databases and two trial registries up to 16 January 2023. Review authors screened reference lists.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We looked for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) involving children and adolescents (16 years of age or under) randomised to receive orthodontic treatment to correct prominent lower front teeth (Class III malocclusion), or no (or delayed) treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Our primary outcome was overjet (i.e. prominence of the lower front teeth); our secondary outcomes included ANB (A point, nasion, B point) angle (which measures the relative position of the maxilla to the mandible).

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 29 RCTs that randomised 1169 children (1102 analysed). The children were five to 13 years old at the start of treatment. Most studies measured outcomes directly after treatment; only one study provided long-term follow-up. All studies were at high risk of bias as participant and personnel blinding was not possible. Non-surgical orthodontic treatment versus untreated control We found moderate-certainty evidence that non-surgical orthodontic treatments provided a substantial improvement in overjet (mean difference (MD) 5.03 mm, 95% confidence interval (CI) 3.81 to 6.25; 4 studies, 184 participants) and ANB (MD 3.05°, 95% CI 2.40 to 3.71; 8 studies, 345 participants), compared to an untreated control group, when measured immediately after treatment. There was high heterogeneity in the analyses, but the effects were consistently in favour of the orthodontic treatment groups rather than the untreated control groups (studies tested facemask (with or without RME), chin cup, orthodontic removable traction appliance, tandem traction bow appliance, reverse Twin Block with lip pads and RME, Reverse Forsus and mandibular headgear). Longer-term outcomes were measured in only one study, which evaluated facemask. It presented low-certainty evidence that improvements in overjet and ANB were smaller at 3-year follow-up than just after treatment (overjet MD 2.5 mm, 95% CI 1.21 to 3.79; ANB MD 1.4°, 95% CI 0.43 to 2.37; 63 participants), and were not found at 6-year follow-up (overjet MD 1.30 mm, 95% CI -0.16 to 2.76; ANB MD 0.7°, 95% CI -0.74 to 2.14; 65 participants). In the same study, at the 6-year follow-up, clinicians made an assessment of whether surgical correction of participants' jaw position was likely to be needed in the future. A perceived need for surgical correction was observed more often in participants who had not received facemask treatment (odds ratio (OR) 3.34, 95% CI 1.21 to 9.24; 65 participants; low-certainty evidence). Surgical orthodontic treatment versus untreated control One study of 30 participants evaluated surgical miniplates, with facemask or Class III elastics, against no treatment, and found a substantial improvement in overjet (MD 7.96 mm, 95% CI 6.99 to 8.40) and ANB (MD 5.20°, 95% CI 4.48 to 5.92; 30 participants). However, the evidence was of low certainty, and there was no follow-up beyond the end of treatment. Facemask versus another non-surgical orthodontic treatment Eight studies compared facemask or modified facemask (with or without RME) to another non-surgical orthodontic treatment. Meta-analysis did not suggest that other treatments were superior; however, there was high heterogeneity, with mixed, uncertain findings (very low-certainty evidence). Facemask versus surgically-anchored appliance There may be no advantage of adding surgical anchorage to facemasks for ANB (MD -0.35, 95% CI -0.78 to 0.07; 4 studies, 143 participants; low-certainty evidence). The evidence for overjet was of very low certainty (MD -0.40 mm, 95% CI -1.30 to 0.50; 1 study, 43 participants). Facemask variations Adding RME to facemask treatment may have no additional benefit for ANB (MD -0.15°, 95% CI -0.94 to 0.64; 2 studies, 60 participants; low-certainty evidence). The evidence for overjet was of low certainty (MD 1.86 mm, 95% CI 0.39 to 3.33; 1 study, 31 participants). There may be no benefit in terms of effect on ANB of alternating rapid maxillary expansion and constriction compared to using expansion alone (MD -0.46°, 95% CI -1.03 to 0.10; 4 studies, 131 participants; low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Moderate-certainty evidence showed that non-surgical orthodontic treatments (which included facemask, reverse Twin Block, orthodontic removable traction appliance, chin cup, tandem traction bow appliance and mandibular headgear) improved the bite and jaw relationship immediately post-treatment. Low-certainty evidence showed surgical orthodontic treatments were also effective. One study measured longer-term outcomes and found that the benefit from facemask was reduced three years after treatment, and appeared to be lost by six years. However, participants receiving facemask treatment were judged by clinicians to be less likely to need jaw surgery in adulthood. We have low confidence in these findings and more studies are required to reach reliable conclusions. Orthodontic treatment for Class III malocclusion can be invasive, expensive and time-consuming, so future trials should include measurement of adverse effects and patient satisfaction, and should last long enough to evaluate whether orthodontic treatment in childhood avoids the need for jaw surgery in adulthood.

Assessment of influence of facemask treatment with skeletal anchorage on the temporomandibular joint using magnetic resonance imaging: a preliminary study

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to investigate the influence of facemask treatment with skeletal anchorage on the temporomandibular joint (TMJ) using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), in patients with Class III malocclusion, accompanied by maxillary retrusion.

METHODS

Fifteen patients with a mean age of 12.1±1.43 years were included in the study. All patients were treated using facemask with skeletal anchorage after eight weeks of Alternate Rapid Maxillary Expansion and Constriction (Alt-RAMEC) protocol. Magnetic resonance imaging was performed before and immediately after facemask treatment for TMJ evaluation. Disc position, condylar translation, degenerative changes of the condyles, and joint effusion were evaluated. To assess whether the alterations associated with the treatment were statistically significant, McNemar and marginal homogeneity tests were used.

RESULTS

After facemask treatment, a statistically significant change was observed in the disc position (an anterior disc displacement with/without reduction in five TMJs) (p<0.05). The alteration in the condylar translation was not statistically significant (p>0.05). This treatment did not cause degenerative changes of the condyles or effusion in any of the TMJs.

CONCLUSION

Facemask treatment with skeletal anchorage following the Alt-RAMEC protocol had a minimal influence on the TMJ, only by means of disc position, which was not negligible. Long-term results of such treatment are required for following up the changes observed in the TMJs.

[Effects of orthopedic treatment on temporomandibular joint in class III patients with anterior crossbite: a literature review]

Objective

The study aimed to evaluate the effects of orthopedic treatment on the temporomandibular joint (TMJ) in class III patients with anterior crossbite.

Materials and Method

Four databases were reviewed until December 2022 (Scopus, PubMed, Embase, and Science Direct). Two independent reviewers selected studies reporting TMJ changes and the presence of TMJ dysfunction in Class III patients with anterior crossbite who received orthopedic treatment. The methodological quality of the studies was analyzed using the PRISMA checklist.

Results

Twelve articles were selected for the study after a detailed search according to the selection criteria. Post-treatment studies demonstrated a low prevalence of TMJ pain after using the Delaire face mask, chin rest, modified Jasper Jumper, and fixed reverse Twin block. After treatment with reverse Twin block, an increase in condylar volume and joint spaces (p<0.001) was observed, followed by a significant decrease in posterosuperior joint spaces (p<0.001).

Conclusions

Not enough evidence has been found to determine the presence of TMD or TMJ changes after using orthopedic devices for anterior crossbite correction.

Three-Dimensional Assessment of the Temporomandibular Joint Changes Following Reversed Twin Block Therapy of Patients With Skeletal Class III Malocclusion in Conjunction With the Photobiomodulation Therapy: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial

Background: Despite the positive effect of the photobiomodulation therapy (PBMT) application on animals, the primary role of this technique on the human condyle is still unclear. Several experimental reports have shown the efficacy of PBMT in inducing cellular changes in the temporomandibular joint (TMJ) region during functional treatment of patients with skeletal deformities. Still, the lack of information about its effects on human condyles requires further studies.

Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the effect of PBMT on the TMJ components following Class III treatment with the reversed twin block (RTB) appliance in growing patients. 

Materials and Method: Forty children (12 females, 28 males) between the age of nine and eleven years with skeletal Class III were assigned randomly to the RTB group with photobiomodulation (RTB+PBMT) or the control group (RTB). The PBMT was applied to the TMJ region using an 808-nm wavelength Ga-Al-As semiconductor laser device with 5 Joules/cm² energydensity on days 1, 3, 7, and 14 of the first month. Afterwards, the irradiation was conducted every 15 days until the end of the treatment. Cone-beam computerized tomography (CBCT) images were taken before (T1) treatment and following the end of treatment (T2) to assess TMJ and skeletal changes.

Results: Condylar volume was significantly increased in the RTB group only by a mean of 287.97 mm³ (p<0.001). The significantly backward and upward condylar movement was observed in the RTB and RTB+PBMT groups (superior joint space (SJS): 0.26 mm, 0.15 mm; posterior joint space (PJS): 0.42mm, 0.11mm, respectively). The RTB group showed the most remarkable changes. Significant improvement of the sagittal maxilla-mandibular relationship was greater in the RTB+PBMT group compared to the RTB group (p=0.02).

Conclusion: There were no considerable differences in the condylar position after Class III treatment between the RTB and the RTB+PBMT groups. But a difference in the condylar volume was noticed between the two group.

The Short-Term Effect of Active Skeletonized Sutural Distractor Appliance on Temporomandibular Joint Morphology of Class III Malocclusion Subjects

Objectives  The purpose of this study was to evaluate the short-term effect of active skeletonized sutural distractor (ASSD) appliance on temporomandibular joint morphology of class III malocclusion subjects.

Materials and Methods  This was a prospective interventional study. Cone-beam computerized tomography (CBCT) images of 22 patients were taken before and after treatment by using Planmeca Promax 3D CBCT machine version 2.9.2 (Planmeca OY Helsinki, Finland). The condylar width, height, length, roof of glenoid fossa thickness, and all joint spaces were measured. The condylar position was determined based on Pullinger and Hollander formula. The condylar shape was determined as per Kinzinger et al. The condylar volume was calculated by using Mimics software (Materialize, Belgium).

Statistical Analysis  Data analysis was performed by using SPSS software version 24. Wilcoxon paired signed-rank test was used to compare the difference in temporomandibular joint morphology and condylar volume between pre- and post-treatment measurements. Chi-square test was used to compare the condylar position and shape.

Results  The superior ( p = 0.000 on the right side, p = 0.005 on the left side) and posterior joint spaces ( p = 0.000 on both sides) were decreased after the treatment, respectively. The condyles were rotated upward and backward, thereby increasing the anterior joint spaces ( p = 0.000 on both sides) after the treatment. The condylar volume increases after treatment, but no significant differences were observed ( p = 0.903 on the right side, p = 0.062 on the left side).

Conclusion  The significant changes were observed in joint spaces. The condyles were more anteriorly placed before treatment. Condylar position and shape alter in response to ASSD treatment. The condylar volume did not show any significant change.

Interventions to reduce bruxism in children and adolescents: a systematic scoping review and critical reflection

The aim of the present study was to perform a critical reflection about intervention options for bruxism reduction in children and adolescents. Search was conducted based on the PICO-structured question: "What are the intervention options to reduce bruxism in children/adolescents?". No language, year, or study design restrictions were imposed. Studies reporting interventions to reduce bruxism in children (< 10) and adolescents (10 to 19 years old) were included. Reviews and letters to editors were not included. From 2723 records, 17 papers were included. Included studies were primarily randomized clinical trials performed in Brazil (35.3%) and using different criteria for the diagnosis of bruxism. Reduction in self-reported bruxism and headaches associated with bruxism were observed in studies that used medications (hydroxyzine/trazodone/flurazepam), occlusal splints, orthodontic interventions, and psychological and physical therapy interventions. Reduction in Rhythmic Masticatory Muscle Activity was observed with the use of the occlusal splint and in orthodontic interventions. Alternative treatments (medicinal extracts such as Melissa officinalis-L) have shown inconclusive results.Conclusions: Several intervention options are available to inhibit or reduce bruxism activity. The respective indication, contraindications, and side effects of each treatment option must be assessed individually and carefully, taking into account that bruxism is not considered a disorder in otherwise healthy individuals.What is known• Biological and psychological factors have been strongly correlated to the development of bruxism• Bruxism prevalence ranging from 6 to 50% in childrenWhat is new• Reduction in self-reported bruxism and headaches associated with bruxism were observed in studies that used medication (Hydroxyzine/ Trazodone/ Flurazepam), occlusal splints, orthodontic interventions, psychological, and physical therapy interventions• A reduction in Rhythmic Masticatory Muscle Activity was observed with the use of the occlusal splint and orthodontic interventions. Alternative treatments (medicinal extracts such as Melissa officinalis L) show inconclusive results in respect of the reduction in bruxism.

Temporomandibular disorders in growing patients after treatment of class II and III malocclusion with orthopaedic appliances: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To determine if the use of orthopaedic appliances in growing patients applied to correct Class II and III malocclusion is related to the development of temporomandibular disorders (TMD).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A systematic review was conducted between 1960 and July 2017, based on electronic databases: PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase, Medline, Scopus, EBSCOhost, Scielo, Lilacs and Bireme. Controlled clinical trials (CCTs) and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were identified. The articles were selected and analyzed by two authors independently. The quality of the evidence was determined according to the guidelines of the Cochrane Risk Bias Assessment Tool and the Cochrane Quality Study Guide.

RESULTS

Seven articles were included, four CCTs and three RCTs. The studies were grouped according to malocclusion treatment in (a) class II appliances (n = 4) and (b) class III appliances (n = 3). The quality of evidence was low due to the high risk of bias, independent of the association reported. All studies concluded that the use of orthopaedic appliances would not contribute to the development of TMD.

CONCLUSIONS

The quality of evidence available is insufficient to establish definitive conclusions, since the studies were very heterogeneous and presented a high risk of bias. However, it is suggested that the use of orthopaedic appliances to correct class II and III malocclusion in growing patients would not be considered as a risk factor for the development of TMD. High-quality RCTs are required to draw any definitive conclusions.

Effect of protraction facemask on the temporomandibular joint: a systematic review

Background

The aim of this study was to assess the influence of protraction facemask (PFM) on temporomandibular joint (TMJ) of skeletal Class III malocclusion patients.

Method

Literature searches were carried out electronically in five English and three Chinese databases (Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE (via Ovid), Chinese Biomedical Literature Database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and VIP Database). The date of the most recent search was 22 March 2017. Randomized controlled trials, controlled clinical trials, cohort studies, and before-after studies comparing the effect of PFM and other treatments on TMJ were included. The data were collected and extracted by three authors. The risk of bias in the RCTs was assessed in accordance with the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. For the nonrandomized studies, the risk of bias was judged with Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.

Results

For the 261 articles identified, 13 studies with 522 participants were included for the final qualitative analysis. Three studies were graded as high value of evidence, while seven studies and the other three studies were graded as moderate value and low value respectively. According to the available evidence, PFM contributed to the significant increase of CondAx-SBL and the significant decrease of CondAx-ML. Thin-plate spline (TPS) analysis showed a horizontal compression in condyles. Condyles tended to move superiorly and posteriorly. Concerning the occurrence of temporomandibular disorders (TMD), PFM was not involved in aggravating TMJ symptoms and signs.

Conclusions

Clinical evidence suggests that PFM might contribute to the morphologic adaptation of TMJs and displacement of condyles, and PFM may well be not a risk factor for the development of TMD.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12903-018-0503-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Relationship between orthodontics and temporomandibular disorders

Since the end of the 20th century, the problems of the temporomandibular disorders (TMDs) have aroused interest to the orthodontists. The aim of this literature review is to present the contemporary evidence concerning the association between the presence of malocclusions and the occurrence of signs and symptoms of the TMJ. In addition, additional variables, which may affect the TMJs of a patient during the orthodontic treatment are pointed out. It is evident that there is an increased number of patients who are seeking for orthodontic treatment, not only in order to enhance their facial aesthetics and the function of mastication system, but also to relieve the symptoms of the temporomandibular joint (TMJ). There are multiple etiological factors that have been associated with the TMDs and they may be manifested by pain and/or sounds of TMJ. In addition, during the clinical examination it can be detected a deviation from the normal function of the mandible.

Selecting subjects with high craniofacial shape homogeneity for clinical trials

INTRODUCTION

Morphologic homogeneity is desirable in sample selection of clinical studies that evaluate methods of treating craniofacial discrepancies in orthodontics. The purposes of this study were to assess sample selection criteria commonly used in the orthodontic literature regarding their effectiveness in achieving morphologic homogeneity, and to propose a method that can guarantee selection of a homogeneous sample, for which the degree of homogeneity and the average skeletal pattern can be specified a priori.

METHODS

Pretreatment lateral cephalograms from 170 consecutive patients (82 boys, 88 girls) aged 7 to 17 years were used. Sixteen skeletal and 4 dental landmarks were digitized and processed with Procrustes superimposition and principal component analysis. The sample was bootstrapped to a virtual population of 10,000 subjects by random sampling from the normal distribution for each principal component. A systematic literature search of randomized controlled trials showed that the most prevalent sample selection criteria, in addition to molar relationship, included overjet, ANB, and SN-GoGn. Each criterion was applied to the virtual population. The morphologic homogeneity of the samples was assessed as the percentage of shape variance of each sample relative to the shape variance of the population.

RESULTS

The first 3 principal components incorporated approximately 53% of shape variability. The evaluated criteria achieved low or moderate morphologic homogeneity scores (range, 28%-63%), and the selected patients were widely spread in the shape space. Although the criteria are commonly applied for selecting samples with skeletal discrepancies, a considerable number of subjects with an average shape were selected. The proposed procedure entails selecting a skeletal pattern appropriate for the study's purpose, setting limits in shape space within which the sample should be confined, and testing candidate patients against these limits. The patients within these boundaries have, by definition, a similar shape to the selected skeletal pattern and form a homogeneous sample.

CONCLUSIONS

The cephalometric variables that have been used in randomized controlled trials do not result in samples of high morphologic homogeneity. The proposed method guarantees high morphologic homogeneity. The extent of homogeneity, the average shape of the sample, and the sample's relationship to the general population's average can be specified a priori.

Orthodontic treatment for prominent lower front teeth (Class III malocclusion) in children

BACKGROUND

Prominent lower front teeth (termed reverse bite; under bite; Class III malocclusion) may be due to a combination of the jaw or tooth positions or both. The upper jaw (maxilla) can be too far back or the lower jaw (mandible) too far forward, or both. Prominent lower front teeth can also occur if the upper front teeth (incisors) are tipped back or the lower front teeth are tipped forwards, or both. Various treatment approaches have been described to correct prominent lower front teeth in children and adolescents.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of orthodontic treatment for prominent lower front teeth in children and adolescents.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases: Cochrane Oral Health Group's Trials Register (to 7 January 2013), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 12), MEDLINE via OVID (1946 to 7 January 2013), and EMBASE via OVID (1980 to 7 January 2013).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) recruiting children or adolescents or both (aged 16 years or less) receiving any type of orthodontic treatment to correct prominent lower front teeth (Class III malocclusion). Orthodontic treatments were compared with control groups who received either no treatment, delayed treatment or a different active intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Screening of references, identification of included and excluded studies, data extraction and assessment of the risk of bias of the included studies was performed independently and in duplicate by two review authors. The mean differences with 95% confidence intervals were calculated for continuous data. Meta-analysis was only undertaken when studies of similar comparisons reported comparable outcome measures. A fixed-effect model was used. The I2 statistic was used as a measure of statistical heterogeneity.

MAIN RESULTS

Seven RCTs with a total of 339 participants were included in this review. One study was assessed as at low risk of bias, three studies were at high risk of bias, and in the remaining three studies risk of bias was unclear. Four studies reported on the use of a facemask, two on the chin cup, one on the tandem traction bow appliance, and one on mandibular headgear. One study reported on both the chin cup and mandibular headgear appliances.One study (n = 73, low quality evidence), comparing a facemask to no treatment, reported a mean difference (MD) in overjet of 4.10 mm (95% confidence interval (CI) 3.04 to 5.16; P value < 0.0001) favouring the facemask treatment. Two studies comparing facemasks to untreated control did not report the outcome of overjet. Three studies (n = 155, low quality evidence) reported ANB (an angular measurement relating the positions of the top and bottom jaws) differences immediately after treatment with a facemask when compared to an untreated control. The pooled data showed a statistically significant MD in ANB in favour of the facemask of 3.93 ° (95% CI 3.46 to 4.39; P value < 0.0001). There was significant heterogeneity between these studies (I2 = 82%). This is likely to have been caused by the different populations studied and the different ages at the time of treatment.One study (n = 73, low quality evidence) reported outcomes of the use of the facemask compared to an untreated control at three years follow-up. This study showed that improvements in overjet and ANB were still present three years post-treatment. In this study, adverse effects were reported but due to the low prevalence of temporomandibular (TMJ) signs and symptoms no analysis was undertaken.Two studies (n = 90, low quality evidence) compared the chin cup with an untreated control. Both studies found a statistically significant improvement in ANB, and one study also found an improvement in the Wits appraisal. Data from these two studies were not suitable for pooling.A single study of the tandem traction bow appliance compared to untreated control (n = 30, very low quality evidence) showed a statistically significant difference in both overjet and ANB favouring the intervention group.The remaining two studies did not report the primary outcome of this review.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is some evidence that the use of a facemask to correct prominent lower front teeth in children is effective when compared to no treatment on a short-term basis. However, in view of the general poor quality of the included studies, these results should be viewed with caution. Further randomised controlled trials with long follow-up are required.

[Early treatment for class III malocclusions: the facts]

The goal of this article is to present some evidence based facts in order to answer the following questions: 1) Is early treatment of class III malocclusions effective? 2) Which therapeutic device is the most effective? 3) Are the results lasting? The positions of Jean Delaire and the author regarding the usefulness of routine early treatment for these dysmorphia will be discussed in a second article [4].