Surgically accelerated orthodontic techniques and periodontal response: a systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Reduction in orthodontic treatment time is gaining popularity due to patient demands. Several new techniques of acceleratory orthodontic treatment have been introduced to effectively treat the malocclusion in a shorter time period with minimal adverse effects. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this systematic review is to critically evaluate the potential effect of accelerated surgically assisted orthodontic techniques on periodontal tissues. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Electronic databases used to perform the search were Medline (Ovid), EMBASE, PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane, Google Scholar, and hand searching of the literature was also performed. SELECTION CRITERIA: Only randomized control trials (RCTs) that assessed the relationship between accelerated surgically assisted orthodontic techniques and its effects on periodontium were included. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: The Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) critical appraisal checklist tool (2016) was used to assess the finally selected studies. Among these studies, five evaluated corticotomy-facilitated orthodontics, two tested accelerated tooth movement with piezocision, one compared corticotomy-facilitated orthodontics with piezocision, and one studied the effects of periodontally accelerated osteogenic orthodontics. The duration of these studies was relatively short and had moderate to high risk of bias. RESULTS: Literature search identified 225 records from 5 databases and 50 articles from the partial grey literature (Google scholar) search. Finally, nine eligible RCTs were included in the review. LIMITATIONS: Most of the included studies were of a high risk of bias due to high experimental heterogeneity and small sample size. Long-term follow-up of the periodontal response to these interventions was also lacking. CONCLUSIONS: There is an absence of evidence considering the lack of long-term follow-up and small sample size therefore, the results of this review should be carefully interpreted. IMPLICATIONS: Due to the need for more studies with less risk of bias, these techniques should be implemented in dental practice with caution. With stronger evidence, the study may be confirmed to provide quicker desired results for orthodontic patients. REGISTRATION: This study protocol was not registered. FUNDING: No funding was obtained for this systematic review.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.044 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".