A narrative review of the effects of vitamin D3 on orthodontic tooth movement: Focus on molecular and cellular mechanisms

Orthodontic tooth movement (OTM) is a critical process in dental alignment, driven by the application of calibrated orthodontic forces. This study delves into the intricate molecular and cellular mechanisms by which vitamin D3 influences OTM. Vitamin D3 is identified as a critical regulator in bone metabolism, enhancing osteoblast activity and bone formation while also modulating osteoclast quantity and RANKL expression, essential for the remodeling of the alveolar bone. The precise mechanisms through which vitamin D3 facilitates these processes are explored, highlighting its potential in accelerating bone remodeling and, consequently, tooth alignment. This comprehensive review underscores vitamin D3's anabolic impact on bone metabolism and its pivotal role in the synthesis and mineralization processes governed by osteoblasts. The findings illuminate vitamin D3's promise in augmenting orthodontic therapy, suggesting its utility in improving treatment efficiency and reducing duration. However, the need for further research into the optimal application of vitamin D3 in orthodontics is emphasized, particularly concerning dosage, timing, and delivery methods.

Stability and failure rate during 3 years of fixed retention: A follow-up of an randomized clinical trial on adolescents with four different lingual retainers

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate stability outcomes and failure rates associated with four types of lingual retainers: (1) dead-soft wire, (2) multistrand stainless steel (SS) wire, (3) CAD/CAM nitinol, and (4) connected bonding pads (CBPs) after 3 years of retention.

METHODS

This study enrolled 96 patients (66 females, 30 males) with a median age of 19 years with four types of lingual retainers: (1) 0.016 × 0.022-inch dead-soft wire, (2) 0.0215-inch five-strand SS wire, (3) 0.014 × 0.014-inch CAD/CAM nitinol wire, and (4) CBPs. The irregularity index, intercanine distances, and arch lengths were obtained and used to evaluate mandibular stability. Failure rates were also assessed during this study. Data were statistically analysed.

RESULTS

Irregularity increased, whereas intercanine width and arch length decreased after 3 years of retention. The greatest irregularity was associated with the CBPs and the least with the CAD/CAM retainers. Changes in stability measurements were significantly higher in the dead-soft wire and CBPs than those in the CAD/CAM nitinol and multistrand SS wires. Parallel to these changes, the frequency of failure yielded similar results with the same significance between the groups. The failure rate of CBPs, in contrast to the CAD/CAM nitinol and multistrand SS wires, was significantly higher in the right quadrant (P < .05).

CONCLUSION

After taking the 3-year results into consideration, CAD/CAM nitinol and multistrand SS wires were found to be more successful than the others in maintaining mandibular stability. The most failures were observed with CBPs after 3 years of retention.

Extraction vs nonextraction orthodontic treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To compare four first premolar extraction and nonextraction treatment effects on intra-arch width, profile, treatment duration, occlusal outcomes, smile aesthetics and stability.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An electronic search of the literature to June 2, 2023 was conducted using health science databases, with additional search of gray literature, unpublished material, and hand searching, for studies reporting nonsurgical patients with fixed appliances regarding sixteen sub-outcomes. Data extraction used customized forms, quality assessed with ROBINS-I (Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies-of Interventions) and Cochrane RoB 2 (risk-of-bias) tool. GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) assessed certainty of evidence.

RESULTS

Thirty (29 retrospective studies, 1 randomized controlled trial) studies were included. Random-effect meta-analysis (95% CI) demonstrated maxillary (MD: -2.03 mm; [-2.97, -1.09]; P < .0001) and mandibular inter-first molar width decrease (MD: -2.00 mm; [-2.71, -1.30]; P < .00001) with four first premolar extraction; mandibular intercanine width increase (MD: 0.68 mm; [0.36, 0.99]; P < .0001) and shorter treatment duration (MD: 0.36 years; [0.10, 0.62]; P = .007) in the nonextraction group. Narrative synthesis included three and five studies for upper and lower lip-E plane, respectively. For American Board of Orthodontics Objective Grading System and maxillary/mandibular anterior alignment (Little's irregularity index), each included two studies with inconclusive evidence. There were no eligible studies for UK Peer Assessment Rating (PAR) score. Class I subgroup/sensitivity analyses favored the same results. Prediction interval indicated no significant difference for all outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Four first premolar extraction results in maxillary and mandibular inter-first molar width decrease and retraction of upper/lower lips. Nonextraction treatment results in mandibular intercanine width increase and shorter treatment duration. There was no significant difference between the two groups regarding maxillary intercanine width, US PAR score, and posttreatment smile esthetics. Further high-quality focused research is recommended.

Extraction vs nonextraction of premolars for orthodontic treatment: A scoping review examining the extent, range, and characteristics of the literature

INTRODUCTION

The debate about whether malocclusion can or should be treated with or without extraction of premolars continues. This scoping review quantifies the literature, summarizes the outcomes researched and methods, and proposes a way to reduce uncertainty in this area.

METHODS

Electronic and gray literature searches were undertaken without language restriction, but non-English language titles and abstracts were not translated. A minimum of 2 people independently screened the titles and abstracts.

RESULTS

Searches identified 9010 articles, of which 3851 were duplicates; 5159 were screened, and 4617 were excluded (1092 laboratory or animal studies, 1219 case reports or series, 2306 with no information). By consensus, 399 articles contained information concerning differences between orthodontic patients treated with or without premolar extractions (143 were unclear). The majority (n = 372) reported outcomes in 8 areas. Fifty-seven were review articles (32 systematic reviews and 25 nonsystematic reviews or opinions). The most common research design in the remainder was a cohort (n = 280, 82% of 342 articles reporting primary data), of which a very large majority were considered retrospective (n = 249, 89% of articles reported for subjects over ≥2 time points). Only 28 (8% of articles reporting primary data) were judged to involve prospective data collection (4 randomized controlled trials [RCTs], 23 cohorts, 1 unclear design). Excluding reviews and unclear articles, 99% (332 out of 336) were considered observational research and only 1% were interventional.

CONCLUSIONS

There was limited low-quality evidence that extracting premolars in orthodontic patients have a possible negative effect in 2 outcome areas and a positive effect in 1 outcome area. Most study reports were of low methodological quality, and further reviews are unlikely to provide new information. Investigators should concentrate on collecting primary data of outcomes important to patients. A protocol has been made available to help reduce methodological differences, assist future meta-analyses and increase the generalizability of findings: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/CQ49Y.

Long-term stability of mandibular incisor alignment in patients treated nonextraction with or without interproximal enamel reduction

INTRODUCTION

This study aimed to compare long-term mandibular incisor stability in nongrowing patients with moderate crowding treated nonextraction with and without interproximal enamel reduction (IPR).

METHODS

Forty-two nongrowing patients with Class I dental and skeletal malocclusion with moderate crowding were divided into 2 groups with an equal number of patients depending on whether IPR was used (IPR group) or not (non-IPR group) during treatment. All patients were treated by the same practitioner and used thermoplastic retainers full-time for 12 ± 1 months at the end of the active treatment. Changes in Peer Assessment Rating scores, Little's irregularity index (LII), intercanine width (ICW), and mandibular incisor inclination (IMPA and L1-NB°) were evaluated using pretreatment, posttreatment, and 8 ± 1 years postretention dental models and lateral cephalograms.

RESULTS

At the end of the treatment, Peer Assessment Rating scores and LII decreased, and ICW, IMPA, and L1-NB° increased significantly (P <0.001) in both groups. At the end of the postretention period, in both groups, LII increased, and ICW decreased significantly (P <0.001) compared with posttreatment values, whereas IMPA and L1-NB remained stable. When treatment changes were compared, increases in ICW, IMPA, and L1-NB were significantly (P <0.001) higher in the non-IPR group. When postretention changes were compared, the only significant difference between 2 groups was observed in ICW. The decrease in ICW was significantly higher in the non-IPR group.

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term stability of mandibular incisor alignment in Class I nongrowing patients with moderate crowding treated nonextraction with and without IPR was similar.

Association between arch width changes and long-term stability 20 years after orthodontic treatment with and without extractions

OBJECTIVES

To investigate long-term stability 20 years after orthodontic treatment and the association with arch width changes during treatment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective study investigated 103 patients with Class I and II malocclusions treated with fixed appliances with and without extractions. The sample was treated by one experienced orthodontist and collected from a private orthodontic office. Dental casts were obtained pretreatment (T1), posttreatment (T2), and long-term postretention (T3); they were scanned and converted to STL files. Measurements were evaluated in for the upper and lower arch: intercanine width (IC), intermolar (IM) width, Little's irregularity index (LII).

RESULTS

There were 73 female and 30 male patients. Class I was present in 74 patients and Class II in 29. Average postretention time was 17.2 (±6.5) years after an average active retention time of 3.4 (±1.17) years. Extraction was performed in 55 patients while 48 received nonextraction treatment. Bonferroni Post Hoc test showed that LII in the upper and lower arches at T1 was significantly higher in the extraction group (P < .001). Upper and lower arch LII at T3 was slightly higher in extraction cases but remained under 2.05 mm. LII at T3 in the upper and lower arches showed negative correlation with IM T3 in the upper arch (Pearson, N = 103, P = .047), while IC in the upper and lower arches at T3 correlated with IM T3 in the upper and lower (N = 103, P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Clinically relevant long-term stability in both arches was found in extraction and nonextraction cases. Intermolar width and its change during orthodontic treatment was an influential factor on long-term stability in extraction cases.

Evaluation of relapse with thermoplastic retainers equipped with microsensors

OBJECTIVES

To examine relapse with thermoplastic retainers equipped with microsensors 1 year after treatment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 42 patients (29 females, 13 males) treated with four premolar extractions were included in this study. Thermoplastic appliances equipped with TheraMon microsensors (Handelsagentur Gschladt, Hargelsberg, Austria) were used to assess daily wear time (DWT), and the patients were monitored at 2-month intervals for a period of 12 months. At the end of the follow-up, the following two groups were formed based on the mean DWT: short wear time (SWT; <9 h/d) and long wear time (LWT; ≥9 h/d). Digital models were constructed before treatment (T0), at debonding (T1), and 6 months (T2) and 12 months (T3) after debonding. Little's Irregularity Index (LII) and the intercanine and intermolar widths, arch lengths, overjet, and overbite were calculated based on the digital models. Data were analyzed statistically.

RESULTS

Irregularity and overjet increased, whereas transverse measurements and arch lengths decreased with time in both groups. During the retention period, overbite decreased in the SWT group but increased in the LWT group. There were significant differences between groups only in mandibular irregularity. The LII values of the SWT group were significantly higher than those of the LWT group for the T1-T2 and T1-T3 time intervals (P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

A mean DWT less than 9 hours/day was inadequate for controlling irregularity within clinically acceptable limits. A wear time of at least 9 h/d is recommended for the maintenance of mandibular anterior alignment.

Occlusal changes in orthodontically treated subjects 40 years after treatment and comparison with untreated control subjects

INTRODUCTION

The objective of this study was to compare the aging changes of the dental arches in orthodontically treated and untreated subjects after a 4-decade follow-up period.

METHODS

This retrospective study analyzed 2 groups. The treated group comprised 29 patients (11 male, 18 female) presenting with Class I or Class II malocclusions orthodontically treated with extractions of 4 first premolars. Dental models taken at pretreatment (12.84 years), posttreatment (14.95 years), and long-term posttreatment (51.37 years) were evaluated. The untreated (control) group consisted of 22 untreated patients with dental models taken at 13.32, 17.82, and 60.95 years of age. The dental models were digitized, and the following variables were evaluated: Little irregularity index, intercanine, interpremolar and intermolar widths, arch length, arch perimeter, overjet, and overbite. Interphase comparison of the treated group was performed with repeated measures analysis of variance and Tukey tests. Intergroup comparisons were performed using t tests (P <0.05).

RESULTS

Crowding was corrected with treatment but relapsed significantly in the long term. Intercanine width increased with treatment and decreased in the long term. Interpremolar and intermolar widths, arch perimeter, and length decreased with treatment and continued to decrease long-term posttreatment. Overjet and overbite were corrected with treatment and remained stable in the long term. From posttreatment to long-term posttreatment, a greater crowding increase was observed in the treated group than in the untreated group. The treated group demonstrated a greater decrease in mandibular intercanine and maxillary and mandibular interpremolar widths than the untreated sample. Overbite increased in the treated group and decreased in the untreated group. The multiple regression analysis showed that previous 4-premolar extractions orthodontic treatment is significantly associated with anterior crowding in the long term.

CONCLUSIONS

In the long-term, the treated patients showed relapse of crowding and a decrease in arch form. Long-term changes of treated patients were different from untreated subjects. Relapse might have contributed to greater changes in incisor crowding and arch widths observed in the treated patients.

Effectiveness of microosteoperforations in accelerating alignment of maxillary anterior crowding in adults: A randomized controlled clinical trial

INTRODUCTION

This trial aimed to investigate the effectiveness of microosteoperforations (MOPs) in overall time taken for alignment of maxillary anterior crowding and to evaluate the alignment improvement percentage within 6 months between MOPs and control groups.

METHODS

Thirty adult participants (25 females and 5 males; mean age, 22.66 ± 3.27 years) with moderate upper labial segment crowding were randomly assigned into intervention and control groups using block randomization. All participants had first premolar extractions, bonded conventional fixed appliances, and 0.014-in, followed by 0.018-in nickel-titanium archwire placement for initial alignment. The intervention group received a 3-mm deep MOPs procedure under local anesthesia using a Propel device (Propel Ortho Singapore, Pte, Ltd, Winstedt Rd, Singapore) on the labial attached gingivae of maxillary incisors at monthly visits until complete alignment. Little's irregularity index was used to assess the overall changes and measure the change of tooth alignment of the 6 maxillary anterior teeth. Assessor blinding was employed.

RESULTS

There was no statistically significant difference in the median overall alignment duration between MOPs and control groups (139 days [95% confidence interval, 115.32-161.83] vs 143 days [95% confidence interval, 107.12-179.74]; hazard ratio, 0.829; P = 0.467). The MOPs procedure had no significant effect on the alignment duration (P = 0.657) and no overall significant difference in alignment improvement percentage among 2 groups on the basis of time (F = 2.53; P = 0.124). No harm was encountered.

CONCLUSIONS

The application of MOPs is no more effective in accelerating initial orthodontic alignment than conventional treatment.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This trial was registered at the ISRCTN registry with the study ID ISRCTN15080404.

PROTOCOL

https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN15080404.

FUNDING

This work was supported by the Postgraduate Trust Fund, Faculty of Dentistry, Universiti Teknologi MARA.

A comparative assessment of failures and periodontal health between 2 mandibular lingual retainers in orthodontic patients. A 2-year follow-up, single practice-based randomized trial

INTRODUCTION

The objective of this study was to compare the survival rates and periodontal health in patients with 3-strand round twisted (RT) vs 8-strand rectangular braided (RB) fixed retainers bonded to all 6 anterior teeth in the mandible.

METHODS

A total of 133 patients completing orthodontic treatment (median age, 24.6 years; 25th percentile, 17.2 years; 75th percentile, 32.4 years; minimum, 15.1 years; maximum, 49.8 years) were randomly allocated in a 1:1 ratio to receive either an RT or RB wire retainer. Inclusion criteria were all mandibular permanent incisors and canines present, no active caries, no restorations, no fractures on the mandibular incisors and canines, no periodontal disease. Patients with poor oral hygiene before debonding were excluded from the trial. The primary outcome was any first-time retainer failure. Secondary outcomes were periodontal index, bleeding on probing, plaque index, gingival index, and probing depth. Randomization was accomplished with random permuted blocks of size 4, 6, or 8 with allocation concealed in sequentially numbered, opaque, sealed envelopes. Blinding was not possible in this trial. Patients were evaluated at baseline, 3, 6, 12, 18, and 24 months after placement of the retainer. Retainer survival was assessed using Cox regression. Periodontal parameters were reported at each time point and generalised estimating equations were used to assess the effect of treatment, time, tooth and treatment X time interaction on the indices.

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics were similar between groups; in 1 patient, the intervention was discontinued. During 2-year follow-up 37 of 66 (56.1%, RT group) and 32 of 66 (48.5%, RB group) retainers failed at least once (log-rank test, P = 0.55). The adjusted hazard ratio was 0.69 (95% confidence interval, 0.42-1.12; P = 0.13). Neither age nor gender was a predictor of failure. All periodontal parameters (periodontal index, bleeding on probing, plaque index, gingival index, and pocket depth) were comparable between groups and remained relatively stable during follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

The overall risk for first-time failure was high and amounted to 52.3% (56.1% in the RT group and 48.5% in the RB group). There was no difference in terms of survival or periodontal health between the examined retainers.

Innovative customized CAD/CAM nickel-titanium lingual retainer versus standard stainless-steel lingual retainer: A randomized controlled trial

Objective

To compare computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) customized nitinol retainers with standard stainlesssteel fixed retainers over a 12-month study period.

Methods

This randomized controlled trial (RCT) was conducted on 62 patients randomly allocated to a control group that received stainless-steel retainers or a test group that received customized CAD/CAM nickel-titanium retainers. Four time points were defined: retainer placement (T0) and 1-month (T1), 6-month (T2), and 12-month (T3) follow-up appointments. At each time point, Little's irregularity index (LII) (primary endpoint) and dental stability measurements such as intercanine width were recorded in addition to assessment of periodontal parameters. Radiological measurements such as the incisor mandibular plane angle (IMPA) were recorded at T0 and T3. Failure events (wire integrity or debonding) were assessed at each time point.

Results

From T0 to T3, LII and other dental measurements showed no significant differences between the two groups. The data for periodontal parameters remained stable over the study period, except for the gingival index, which was slightly, but significantly, higher in the test group at T3 (p = 0.039). The IMPA angle showed no intergroup difference. The two groups showed no significant difference in debonding events.

Conclusions

This RCT conducted over a 12-month period demonstrated no significant difference between customized CAD/CAM nickel-titanium lingual retainers and standard stainlesssteel lingual retainers in terms of dental anterior stability and retainer survival. Both retainers eventually appeared to be equally effective in maintaining periodontal health.

Anterior tooth alignment and arch dimensions changes: 37-year follow-up in patients treated with and without premolar extraction

INTRODUCTION

The objective of this research was to evaluate the anterior tooth alignment and dental arch dimension changes after orthodontic treatments with and without premolar extractions in the long-term.

METHODS

Fifty-seven patients with Class I and Class II malocclusion were divided into 2 groups. Group 1 included 16 patients treated with nonextraction therapy, with mean initial (T1), final (T2), and long-term follow-up (T3) ages of 13.20 years, 15.07 years, and 50.32 years, respectively. The mean treatment (T2 - T1) and long-term follow-up (T3 - T2) times were 1.86 years and 35.25 years, respectively. Group 2 included 41 patients treated with extraction of 4 first premolars, with T1, T2, and T3 ages of 13.31 years, 15.63 years, and 53.60 years, respectively. The mean treatment and long-term follow-up times were 2.32 years and 37.96 years, respectively. The mean retention time was 2.26 years for both groups. The dental casts were obtained and digitized at T1, T2, and T3 stages. The following measurements were obtained: Little irregularity index, arch length, perimeter, and intercanine, interpremolar, and intermolar widths. Intragroup and intergroup comparisons were performed with repeated measures analysis of variance and t tests, respectively.

RESULTS

Anterior tooth irregularity index increased at T3 in both groups. In addition, all arch dimensions, except the intercanine width, were significantly smaller in the extraction group at T3. Both groups showed similar arch dimension changes at T3, except for the mandibular arch perimeter. The percentage of mandibular anterior tooth alignment change was significantly greater in the nonextraction than in the extraction group.

CONCLUSIONS

There was no difference in the changes of anterior alignment and transverse arch dimensions in patients treated with and without premolar extraction at T3, but the percentage of mandibular anterior tooth alignment changes was higher in the nonextraction than in the extraction patients at T3. The mandibular arch perimeter showed more of a decrease at T3 in extraction patients.