Escaping the Adverse Impacts of NSAIDs on Tooth Movement During Orthodontics: Current Evidence Based on a Meta-Analysis

Medications Affecting Treatment Outcomes in Dentistry: Part 2

Today, it is common for medically complex patients who are receiving multiple medications, to seek routine and emergent dental care. It is essential for the practitioner to recognize and comprehend the impact of such medications on the patient's ability to tolerate the planned dental treatment and on dental treatment outcomes. An active appraisal of current literature is essential to stay abreast of emerging findings and understand their treatment implications. This article outlines the process of such active critical appraisal, illustrating key paradigms of the models that describe the impact of medications on treatment outcomes.

Nociceptor mechanisms underlying pain and bone remodeling via orthodontic forces: toward no pain, big gain

Orthodontic forces are strongly associated with pain, the primary complaint among patients wearing orthodontic braces. Compared to other side effects of orthodontic treatment, orthodontic pain is often overlooked, with limited clinical management. Orthodontic forces lead to inflammatory responses in the periodontium, which triggers bone remodeling and eventually induces tooth movement. Mechanical forces and subsequent inflammation in the periodontium activate and sensitize periodontal nociceptors and produce orthodontic pain. Nociceptive afferents expressing transient receptor potential vanilloid subtype 1 (TRPV1) play central roles in transducing nociceptive signals, leading to transcriptional changes in the trigeminal ganglia. Nociceptive molecules, such as TRPV1, transient receptor potential ankyrin subtype 1, acid-sensing ion channel 3, and the P2X3 receptor, are believed to mediate orthodontic pain. Neuropeptides such as calcitonin gene-related peptides and substance P can also regulate orthodontic pain. While periodontal nociceptors transmit nociceptive signals to the brain, they are also known to modulate alveolar bone remodeling in periodontitis. Therefore, periodontal nociceptors and nociceptive molecules may contribute to the modulation of orthodontic tooth movement, which currently remains undetermined. Future studies are needed to better understand the fundamental mechanisms underlying neuroskeletal interactions in orthodontics to improve orthodontic treatment by developing novel methods to reduce pain and accelerate orthodontic tooth movement-thereby achieving "big gains with no pain" in clinical orthodontics.

Pain Intensity of Skeletally Anchored Maxillary Molar Distalization in Conjunction with Micro-osteoperforations: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Objective To assess pain intensity levels during orthodontic therapy of Class II malocclusion patients undergoing skeletally anchored maxillary molar distalization assisted with different micro-osteoperforation (MOP) approaches. Methods Twenty-seven patients (12 males and 18 females) with a mean age of 16.1 ± 0.3 years were randomized into three equal groups (n=9): Group 1 comprised MOPs on buccal surface, Group 2 comprised MOPs on buccal and palatal surface, and Group 3 comprised the control or no-MOP group. The patients underwent maxillary molar distalization using skeletally anchored distal jet appliance assisted with or without MOPs. The MOPs were applied repeatedly on the buccal and buccal and palatal sides, or no MOP (control). Pain intensity was assessed using a 10 cm visual analog scale after each device activation at 24, 48, 72 hours, and at seven days. Data were analyzed using one-way ANOVA and repeated measures ANOVA for non-paired and paired means. Results Both approaches of buccal and buccal and palatal application of MOPs showed statistically significant (p< 0.01) higher levels of pain intensity after the first activation at 24 hours. Nevertheless, pain intensity levels decreased significantly in both MOP groups and between the two activations. Conclusion The repeated application of MOPs on either the buccal side only or on both buccal and palatal sides during maxillary molar distalization did not affect the levels of pain experienced; however, these levels were reported to be higher than that obtained in the control group. Moreover, it is observed that these pain levels tend to gradually reduce to mild levels over the subsequent days.

Potential Uses of Adhatoda Vasica in Orthodontics

Plaque control, pain control, and modulation of inflammatory mediators to accelerate or stabilize tooth movements are hot issues in orthodontics. The recent advent of phytochemicals as biological mediators has opened new vistas in the aforementioned areas of orthodontics. Adhatoda vasica has caught the attention of investigators due to multiple properties related to orthodontics. This study addresses the potential areas of use of A. vasica in orthodontics, which provide ideas for further investigations. A. vasica possesses antibacterial activity, antifungal activity, anti-oxidant effect, anti-inflammatory activity, analgesic effect, osteogenic, and osteoclastic activities. A. vasica has huge potential in orthodontics, whereas all these vistas need careful and methodical testing before use in clinical orthodontics. In the future, investigators can focus on these aspects of the use of A. vasica to develop products.

Interval Vibration Reduces Orthodontic Pain Via a Mechanism Involving Down-regulation of TRPV1 and CGRP

BACKGROUND/AIM

The transient receptor potential vanilloid 1 (TRPV1) ion receptor is involved in the release of calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP), a major contributor to orthodontic pain. Approaches that attenuate expression of TRPV1 and CGRP may reduce orthodontic pain. We explored the ability of high-frequency interval vibration to reduce orthodontic pain.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Orthodontic force (50 g) was applied to both maxillary first molars in 8-week-old Wistar rats (n=72). Vibration was applied at 125 Hz for 15 min/day. Duration of face grooming was assessed as a measure of orthodontic pain. Immunofluorescence and western blotting were used to assess TRPV1 and CGRP in the trigeminal ganglia.

RESULTS

Compared to orthodontic force alone, application of vibration significantly decreased the duration of face grooming at 24 h and day 3 and reduced expression of TRPV1 and CGRP at 24 h.

CONCLUSION

Vibration represents a promising mechanical approach to reduce orthodontic pain.

Different Therapeutic Effects of CO2 and Diode Laser Irradiation on Tooth Movement-Related Pain

Although orthodontic treatment is common, orthodontic force often induced pain. Low-level laser therapy (LLLT) has been investigated to improve therapeutic comfort. In dentistry, LLLT is mainly applied using two types of lasers, CO₂ and diode lasers, whose biological actions are thought to be associated with wavelength (CO₂: 10,600 nm; diode: 808 nm). The analgesic effect of LLLT on orthodontic treatment-related pain is widely reported but inconsistent. This study aimed to (1) determine whether irradiation with a CO₂ or diode laser attenuates orthodontic treatment-related pain using the jaw-opening reflex model, (2) elucidate the optimal irradiation protocol for both lasers to obtain the maximal analgesic effect, (3) evaluate the effects of laser irradiation on other biological features [e.g., tooth movement, glial fibrillary acidic protein (GFAP) expression, and temperature alterations] and (4) investigate the mechanism underlying the analgesic effect of laser irradiation. In this animal model, orthodontic treatment-induced pain manifested as a significantly reduced the threshold for inducing the jaw-opening reflex on the orthodontically treated side compared with the contralateral side. GFAP expression in the bilateral trigeminal ganglia (TGs) was significantly increased by the application of orthodontic force. CO₂ laser irradiation of the orthodontically treated region significantly increased the threshold for inducing the jaw-opening reflex and the peripheral temperature. Similar reductions in jaw-opening reflex excitability were induced by surface anesthesia and thermal stimulation but not, the diode laser. Neither CO₂ nor diode laser irradiation altered GFAP expression in the TGs. Infiltration anesthesia also significantly increased the threshold for inducing the jaw-opening reflex on each anesthetized side. Irradiation (30 s) by either laser immediately after orthodontic force application (preirradiation) significantly decreased jaw-opening reflex excitability and GFAP expression in the bilateral TGs the next day. However, thermal stimulation immediately after orthodontic force application failed to alter jaw-opening reflex excitability the next day. Laser irradiation did not alter tooth movement; however, an optimized irradiation protocol for aiding tooth movement is suggested. In conclusion, both CO₂ and diode lasers are able to prevent orthodontic treatment-related pain. Furthermore, the involvement of temperature alterations and surface anesthesia in the analgesic effect induced by CO₂ laser irradiation is suggested.

Effects of micro-osteoperforations on intraoral miniscrew anchored maxillary molar distalization : A randomized clinical trial

PURPOSE

The aim was to study the effects of micro-osteoperforations (MOPs) on miniscrew-supported maxillary molar distalization.

METHODS

As part of a single center, split-mouth, randomized clinical trial, 20 eligible subjects were randomly recruited from patients who had applied to the orthodontics department of a university dental hospital. In the experimental group, subjects were randomized to receive MOPs to either the left or right maxillary molar region (n = 10). The control group (n = 10) and the contralateral sides of the experimental group (n = 10) did not receive any MOPs. In both groups, distalization of the maxillary molars was performed by miniscrew-supported distalization appliances. Using 3D models, maxillary molar distalization at 3, 6, 9, and 12 weeks was measured. Pain, discomfort, eating difficulty, and speech problem levels were assessed using a visual analog scale (VAS 0-10). Periodontal evaluations were performed.

RESULTS

In all, 18 subjects completed the study. The mean amount of tooth movement was significantly greater on the MOP side compared to contralateral side of the experimental group at all time points. After 12 weeks, the maxillary molars on the MOP side moved 1.17-fold more than those on the contralateral side. No significant differences were found regarding amount of tooth movement between the control group and the MOP and contralateral sides of the experimental group. The rates of tooth movement in the MOP sides of the experimental group, contralateral sides of the experimental group, and the control group were 0.029, 0.025, and 0.028 mm/day, respectively. Pain VAS scores after intervention were significantly increased on the MOP side compared with the contralateral side of the experimental group but not at any other time point. No differences in periodontal scores between the groups were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

A 1.17-fold increase in the rate of tooth movement in the MOP group compared with the contralateral side was recorded. However the accelerating effect of MOPs was lower than expected. The mean pain level was statistically greater in the MOP group compared to the contralateral side only on the first day of application.

Systematic reviews in orthodontics: Impact of the PRISMA for Abstracts checklist on completeness of reporting

INTRODUCTION

This study evaluated and compared the completeness of reporting of abstracts of orthodontics systematic reviews before and after the publication of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) extension for Abstracts Checklist (PRISMA-A).

METHODS

Abstracts of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in orthodontics published in PubMed, Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews databases before March 23, 2018, that met the predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria, were evaluated using the 12 items of PRISMA-A, scoring each item from 0 to 2. Abstracts were classified into 2 groups: before and after publication of the PRISMA-A checklist. Three calibrated evaluators (intraclass correlation coefficient and kappa > 0.8) assessed the scores for compliance with the checklist. The number of authors, country of affiliation of the first author, performance of meta-analysis, and topic of the article were recorded. A regression analysis was performed to assess the associations between abstract characteristics and the PRISMA-A scores.

RESULTS

Of 1034 abstracts evaluated, 389 were included in the analysis. The mean PRISMA-A score was 53.39 (95% CI, 51.83-54.96). The overall score for studies published after the publication of the checklist was significantly higher than for studies published before (P ≤ 0.0001). The components returning significantly higher scores after publication of PRISMA-A were title (P = 0.024), information from databases (P = 0.026), risk of bias (P ≤ 0.0001), included studies (P ≤ 0.0001), synthesis of results (P ≤ 0.0001), interpretation of results (P = 0.035), financing and conflict of interest (P ≤ 0.0001), and registration (P ≤ 0.0001). These results showed the positive effect of PRISMA-A had on the quality of reporting of orthodontics systematic reviews. Nevertheless, the poor adherence revealed that there is still need for improvement in the quality of abstract reporting.

CONCLUSIONS

The quality of reporting of abstracts of orthodontic systematic reviews and meta-analyses increased after the introduction of PRISMA-A.

Does long-term use of pain relievers have an impact on the rate of orthodontic tooth movement? A systematic review of animal studies

Background

Pain relief drugs are used and misused widely and may theoretically affect the events leading to orthodontic tooth movement.

Objective

To systematically investigate and appraise the quality of the available evidence regarding the effect of pain relief medications on the rate of orthodontic tooth movement.

Search methods

Search without restrictions in eight databases (including grey literature) and hand searching until October 2018.

Selection criteria

Animal controlled studies investigating the effect of pain relievers on the rate of orthodontic tooth movement.

Data collection and analysis

Following study retrieval and selection, relevant data were extracted and the risk of bias was assessed using the SYRCLE’s risk of bias tool.

Results

Fourteen studies were finally identified, most of which at unclear risk of bias. Ibuprofen and loxoprofen did not show any significant effects on the rate of orthodontic tooth movement, whereas indomethacin, ketorolac, morphine, and high doses of etoricoxib were found to decrease it. Inconsistent or conflicting effects were noted after the administration of acetaminophen, acetylsalicylic acid, celecoxib, meloxicam, and tramadol. The quality of the available evidence was considered at best as low.

Conclusions

Long-term consumption of pain relievers may affect the rate of orthodontic tooth movement. The orthodontist should be capable of identifying patients taking pain relievers independently of orthodontic treatment and consider the possible implications.

Trial registration

PROSPERO (CRD42017078208).