The effect of combined corticotomy and low level laser therapy on the rate of orthodontic tooth movement: split mouth randomized clinical trial

Acceleration of Orthodontic Tooth Movement: A Bibliometric and Visual Analysis

BACKGROUND

Prolonged orthodontic treatment duration has long been a concern for orthodontists and patients, leading to a surge in publications on accelerated orthodontic tooth movement (OTM). This study aims to investigate the knowledge landscape, hotspots, and research trends in acceleration of OTM using bibliometric and visual analyses.

METHODS

A comprehensive search was conducted in the Web of Science (WOS) Core Collection to identify relevant publications related to acceleration of OTM. R Biblioshiny, VOS viewer, and a bibliometric online analysis platform were used to conduct the bibliometric and visualization analysis. Curve fitting and correlation analysis were performed to examine the correlation global and country economics and publication trends, and to predict publication numbers.

RESULTS

A total of 647 articles on accelerated OTM were included in the analysis, with clinical and non-clinical publications accounting for 43.59% and 31.22%, respectively. The annual publication numbers exhibited an upward trend, correlating positively with both global gross domestic product (GDP) (r = 0.915, P < .001) and the GDP of individual countries/regions (r = 0.976, P < .001). China produced the most documents (94), while the USA led in citation count (2758) and international collaborations. Wilcko WM was the top-cited author, with eight of the top 10 authors from the USA and the remainder from Asia. Keywords such as 'tooth movement', 'corticotomy', 'piezocision' and 'low-level laser therapy' were the most prominent themes, while topics like 'micro-osteoperforation', 'plasma', 'gingival crevicular fluid' and 'pain' have become recent research hotspots and frontiers.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides a comprehensive overview of the research on accelerated OTM, highlighting hotspots and frontiers, fostering collaboration among authors and countries/regions, and contributing to future research endeavours.

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures of Flapless Corticotomy with Low-Level Laser Therapy in En Masse Retraction of Upper Anterior Teeth: A Three-Arm Randomized Controlled Trial

(1) Background: This study aimed to compare patient-reported outcome measures when accelerating en masse retraction between the piezocision procedure and the subsequent application of low-level laser therapy (FC+LLLT), with the piezocision alone (FC), and in a control group. (2) Methods: A three-arm randomized controlled trial (RCT) was conducted involving 60 patients (41 females and 19 males) with Class II division I malocclusion. The en masse retraction was performed using NiTi closed coil springs attached to miniscrews. The LLLT was performed using an 808 nm Ga-Al-As diode laser. Patient responses regarding pain, discomfort, swelling, and chewing difficulties were reported at ten assessment points. (3) Results: The greatest pain levels were observed 24 h after the application of force during the first and third months of retraction. The mean pain, discomfort, swelling, and chewing difficulties were significantly smaller in the control group than in the FC and FC+LLLT groups. High satisfaction levels were reported in all three groups (p < 0.05). (4) Conclusions: The accelerated en masse retraction via piezocision, followed by a small course of LLLT, was accompanied by significantly fewer pain, discomfort, and chewing difficulties than the control group. LLLT is a valuable addition to piezocision, with an improved patient experience.

Comparative Efficacy of Traditional Corticotomy and Flapless Piezotomy in Facilitating Orthodontic Tooth Movement: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background and Objectives: This study aimed to perform a meta-analysis comparing the effects of corticotomy and flapless piezocision on accelerated tooth movement. Materials and Methods: A comprehensive search using a combination of controlled vocabulary (MeSH) and free-text terms was undertaken by two reviewers to identify published systematic reviews. Three major electronic databases (Medline via PubMed, Cochrane Database, and Embase) were searched up to 2 June 2023. Results: The results of the meta-analysis showed that the pooled standardized mean difference values of accumulative movement distances for flapless piezocision were 1.43 (95% CI, 0.38 to 2.48; p < 0.01), 1.09 (95% CI, -0.08 to 2.26; p = 0.07), and 0.73 (95% CI, -0.58 to 4.02; p = 0.14). The results of the meta-analysis demonstrated that the pooled SMD values of accumulative movement distances for the corticotomy were 2.76 (95% CI, 0.18 to 5.34; p = 0.04), 1.43 (95% CI, -1.10 to 3.96; p = 0.27), and 4.78 (95% CI, -4.54 to 14.10; p = 0.32). Although the test for overall effectiveness was significant for piezocision and corticotomy, there were no significant differences between piezocision and corticotomy. Conclusions: The study determined that both conventional corticotomy and flapless piezosurgery are effective as adjuncts to orthodontic treatment. Moreover, no significant difference was observed in the short-term effectiveness of canine retraction acceleration between conventional corticotomy and flapless piezocision. While piezocision may be a favorable option for orthodontic treatment, corticotomy can be considered in cases requiring additional procedures such as bone grafting.

Duration of canine retraction with fixed appliances: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Space closure is a challenging and time-consuming phase of orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances. This systematic review evaluated canine retraction duration using fixed appliances after maxillary first premolar extraction.

METHODS

Unrestricted systematic literature searches were conducted in 8 databases for randomized clinical trials, assessing the duration and rate of maxillary canine retraction using fixed appliances with or without treatment adjuncts published up to July 2021. Study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias evaluation were conducted independently and in duplicate. Random-effects meta-analyses of average rates or mean differences (MD) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were conducted at α = 5%, followed by sensitivity and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation analysis.

RESULTS

Fifty randomized clinical trials (6 parallel and 44 split-mouth designs) covering 811 participants (mean age 19.9 years; 34% male) were included. The estimated average pooled duration to achieve complete canine retraction was 4.98 months (2 trials; 95% CI, -2.9 to 12.88 months). Pooled average canine retraction was 0.97 mm at months 0-1 (23 trials; 95% CI, 0.79-1.16), 1.83 mm at months 0-2 (20 trials; 95% CI, 1.52-2.14), 2.44 mm at months 0-3 (23 trials; 95% CI, 2.10-2.79), 3.49 mm at months 0-4 (6 trials; 95% CI, 1.81-5.17) and 4.25 mm at months 0-5 (2 trials; 95% CI, 0.36-8.14). Surgically-assisted orthodontics was associated with greater canine retraction at all time points: months 0-1 (10 trials; MD, 0.52 mm; P = 0.004), months 0-2 (8 trials; MD, 0.53 mm; P = 0.04), months 0-3 (8 trials; MD, 0.67 mm; P = 0.01), and months 0-4 (3 trials; MD, 1.13 mm; P = 0.01), whereas subgroup analyses indicated significant effects of anchorage reinforcement method and bracket slot size on canine retraction.

CONCLUSIONS

The average time to achieve complete retraction of the maxillary canine using fixed appliances was around 5.0 months. Most studies used split-mouth randomization to investigate canine retraction for around 1-3 months, with substantial heterogeneity across studies. At 3 months of treatment, high-quality evidence supported greater canine retraction with surgically-assisted orthodontics.

The Effectiveness of Repetition or Multiplicity of Different Surgical and Non-Surgical Procedures Compared to a Single Procedure Application in Accelerating Orthodontic Tooth Movement: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

In this study, we aimed to assess the current scientific evidence concerning the effectiveness of combining two acceleration techniques or repeating an acceleration procedure in comparison with the single application in terms of the speed of the orthodontic tooth movement (OTM). We performed a comprehensive electronic search to retrieve relevant studies on 10 databases. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on fixed orthodontic treatment patients who received multiple types of acceleration techniques or underwent a repeated acceleration procedure compared to a single application were included. Version 2 of the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials (RoB 2) was used for assessing the risk of bias of retrieved studies. A total of six RCTs were included in this review. Regarding multiple acceleration methods, it seems that the combination of low-level laser therapy (LLLT) with a surgical technique outperforms the single application of each technique separately. Additionally, the combination of two surgical interventions may have a synergistic effect leading to reduced treatment time compared to the application of a single intervention. Regarding acceleration method repetition, it seems that the re-application of surgical procedures twice is more efficient than the single application. The meta-analysis showed a non-significant difference in the canine retraction rate between the four-weekly micro-osteoperforations (MOPs) (three times of applications) and both the eight-weekly MOPs (two times of applications) [mean difference (MD) = 0.24; 95% CI: -0.2-0.77; p = 0.36], as well as 12-weekly MOPs (two times of applications) (MD = 0.06; 95% CI: -0.14-0.27; p = 0.55). Based on very low evidence, combining two acceleration techniques is superior over a single application in accelerating tooth movement. Again, very low evidence suggests that the efficacy of repetition of surgical procedures twice and three times is similar. Further high-quality RCTs are required to assess the benefit of repeating an acceleration procedure or combining two different methods. In addition, more insight is needed into the possible side effects associated with the repetition or multiplicity of procedures.

The protocol of low-level laser therapy in orthodontic practice: A scoping review of literature

Low-level laser therapy (LLLT) has been widely investigated as an adjunct technique for orthodontic treatment due to photobiomodulation effect. LLLT appears to be supportive for an orthodontic practice in terms of tooth movement acceleration, pain relief, and root resorption management. The decrease in these adverse effects will enhance the compliance in orthodontic patients, which could positively impact treatment outcomes. However, there seemed to be inconsistency in the impact of LLLT as well as its laser and treatment parameters. This scoping review aimed to evaluate the impact of different irradiation parameters on tooth movement acceleration, pain relief, and root resorption as well as to construct a protocol of LLLT in orthodontic practice. The search was conducted across PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Embase, Google Scholar, and the reference lists of identified articles. The last search was conducted on October 10, 2021 to identify experiments in humans regarding the application of LLLT as noninvasive treatment in orthodontic practice published between 2010 and 2021. However, they were excluded if they were not clinical research, if they did not report the source of laser, or if they were not relevant to tooth movement, pain perception, and root resorption, or if they were not available in English or in full-text. Following the systematic search and selection process, 60 articles were included in this review. A majority of included articles were published in the past few years. The findings of this review supported the application of LLLT in orthodontic practice with purposes of tooth movement acceleration and pain reduction. The positive impact of LLLT on root resorption had not been clearly evident yet. As this review demonstrated heterogeneity of both laser and treatment parameters, further research should be required to ensure the effectiveness of its specific parameters in orthodontic practice.