Int J Stomatol

Int J Stomatol ›› 2022, Vol. 49 ›› Issue (5): 548-555.doi: 10.7518/gjkq.2022053

• Original Articles • Previous Articles     Next Articles

Meta-analysis of the long-term effect of maxillary protraction on jaw growth and development

Zhang Shan(),Ge Xiaolei,Li Jie,Xie Xinyu,Chang Weiwei,Ma Wensheng.()   

  1. Dept. of Orthodontics, Hebei Key Laboratory of Stomatology, Hebei Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases, School and Hospital of Stomatology, Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang 050017, China
  • Received:2021-08-20 Revised:2022-02-24 Online:2022-09-01 Published:2022-09-16
  • Contact: Wensheng. Ma E-mail:245244212@qq.com;798311029@qq.com
  • Supported by:
    Hebei Provincial Government Funded Clinical Medicine Talents Training Project(MXZB00263);The Medical Applicable Technology Following Project of Hebei Province(GZ2021038)

RichHTML

13

PDF (PC)

742

Abstract:

Objective To evaluate the long-term stability of maxillary protraction in the treatment of Angle Class Ⅲ malocclusion in children with mixed dentition. Methods A comprehensive search of Cochrane Library, PubMed, Ovid, ScienceDirect, Wiley, China Academic Journal Full-text Database, China Biology Medicine Disc, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, China Science and Technology Journal Database, Wan Fang database and other foreign and Chinese databases was conducted until 18 August 2021. Literature screening, quality evaluation and data extraction were carried out by two scholars. Meta-analysis was carried out by RevMan5.3 software, and the evidence quality of the outcome index was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation evidence grading system. The results consist of active treatment changes and posttreatment changes, as well as the overall changes in SNA, SNB, ANB, Co-A, Co-Gn, SN-GoGn. Results Ten articles that met the requirements were included. The treated group, which comprised patients with Angle Class Ⅲ malocclusion treated by maxillary protraction, was compared with the untreated Class Ⅲ control group. The results of the meta-analysis showed statistical differences in the increase in SNA, SNB, ANB, Co-A and Co-Gn during the T1-T2 period (P<0.05) and no statistical difference in SN-GoGn (P>0.05). During the T2-T3 period, SNA, SNB, ANB and Co-Gn significantly decreased (P<0.05), but Co-A and SN-GoGn had no significant change (P>0.05). During T1-T3, SNA, SNB, ANB, Co-A and Co-Gn was significantly changed (P<0.05), whereas SN-GoGn had no significant change (P>0.05). Conclusion The analysis of patients with Angle Class Ⅲ malocclusion who were treated by maxillary protraction revealed that the maxillary and mandibular effects come from the active treatment period. Although the Class Ⅲ growth pattern had a tendency to be re-established during the posttreatment period, facemask therapy remarkably improved the maxillary and mandibular sagittal positions and maxilla-mandible relationship, promoted midface growth and inhibited mandibular growth during the long-term observation. More large samples and high-quality clinical studies are needed to verify this conclusion.

Key words: maxillary protraction, Angle Class Ⅲ, growth and development, stability, Meta-analysis

CLC Number: 

  • R 783.5

TrendMD: 

Fig 1

Flow chart of literatures screening"

Tab 1

Characteristics of included studies"

纳入研究研究类型例数试验组特征干预措施随访时间/年对照组特征

Ngan等[16]

（1998）

病例对照试验：试验组（前瞻性）；对照组（回顾性）30/20中国人，骨性Ⅲ类，安氏Ⅲ类，前牙反??，（8.4±1.8）岁扩弓前牵，扩弓每天2次380 g，30°，≥12 h2未经治疗安氏Ⅲ类患者，按照种族、年龄、性别、骨性特征、随访时间与试验组匹配

Macdonald等[17]

（1999）

病例对照试验（回顾性）24/27骨性Ⅲ类，安氏Ⅲ类，前牙反??或对刃??，ANB<1°，wits值≤0 mm，7.4 岁扩弓前牵，扩弓每天2次200~450 g，15°~30°，前3~4月18~22 h，后3~4月仅夜间佩戴≥0.5未经治疗安氏Ⅲ类患者，按照年龄、性别、随访时间与试验组匹配

Chong等[18]

（1996）

病例对照试验：试验组（前瞻性）；对照组（回顾性）16/13前牙反??，（6.80±1.13）岁前牵，230~285 g，30°~40°，12~16 h≥1未经治疗安氏Ⅲ类患者，按照年龄、随访时间与试验组匹配

Anne Mandall等[19]

（2012）

前瞻性随机对照试验13/10北美人，混合牙列晚期，安氏Ⅲ类，前牙反??，wits值≤-2 mm，（8.6±0.08）岁扩弓前牵，扩弓每天1次400 g，≥14 h1.25±0.58未经治疗安氏Ⅲ类患者，按种族、牙齿阶段、错??类型、性别与试验组匹配

Westwood等[20]

（2003）

病例对照试验（回顾性）34/22欧美白人，安氏Ⅲ类，前牙反??或对刃??，wits值≤-1.5 mm, CS1~CS2，（8.25±1.83）岁扩弓前牵，扩弓每天1~2次300~500 g，≥14 h，全部患者二期固定矫治5.58±2.25未经治疗安氏Ⅲ类患者，按照性别、年龄、随访时间与试验组匹配

Pavoni等[21]

（2019）

病例对照试验（回顾性）32/20白人，骨性Ⅲ类，安氏Ⅲ类，前牙反??或对刃??，wits值≤-2 mm，CS1~ CS3，（8.4±1.2）岁

扩弓前牵+下颌??垫

扩弓每天1~2次，400~500 g，30°，≥14 h，??垫全天佩戴，26名患者二期固定矫治

5.2±2.1未经治疗安氏Ⅲ类患者，按照年龄、骨龄、随访时间与试验组匹配

Masucci等[22]

（2011)

病例对照试验：试验组（前瞻性）；对照组（回顾性）30/13欧洲人，安氏Ⅲ类，前牙反??或对刃??，wits值≤-2 mm，CS1~CS3，（9.2±1.6）岁扩弓前牵，扩弓每天1~2次400~500 g，≥14 h，19名患者进行二期固定矫治

8.4±0.9

未经治疗安氏Ⅲ类患者，按照种族、年龄、骨龄、性别、错??畸形程度、随访时间与试验组匹配

Baccetti等[23]

（2000)

病例对照试验（回顾性）16/11北美人，混合牙列早期，安氏Ⅲ类，前牙反??，wits值≤-2 mm，（7±0.58）岁扩弓前牵，扩弓每天1次400 g，≥14 h1.52±0.58未经治疗安氏Ⅲ类患者，按种族、牙齿阶段、错??类型、性别与试验组匹配

Cozza等[24]

（2010)

病例对照试验：试验组（前瞻性）；对照组（回顾性）22/12

白人，安氏Ⅲ类，前牙反??或对刃??，wits值≤-2 mm，CS1~CS2，（8.9±

1.5）岁

前牵+下颌??垫，600 g，30°~40°，≥14 h，

??垫全天佩戴

2.1±1.3未经治疗安氏Ⅲ类患者，按照牙性和骨性特征、骨龄、随访时间与试验组匹配

Baccetti等[25]

（2010）

病例对照试验：试验组（前瞻性）；对照组（回顾性）22/14安氏Ⅲ类，前牙反??或对刃??，wits值≤-2 mm，CS1，（8.9±1.5）岁前牵+下颌??垫，600 g，≥14 h，??垫全天佩戴2未经治疗安氏Ⅲ类患者，按照骨龄、随访时间与试验组匹配

Tab 2

Risk of bias of included studies using Robins-Ⅰ tools"

纳入研究干预前干预时干预后整体偏倚
混杂偏倚选择受试者偏倚干预分类偏倚意向干预偏离偏倚丢失数据偏倚结局测量偏倚选择性报告偏倚
Baccetti等[23]（2000）低低低低低低低低
Baccetti等[25]（2010）低低低低低低低低
Chong等[18]（1996）中低低低低低低中
Macdonald等[17]（1999）中中低低低低低中
Masucci等[22]（2011）低低低低低低低低
Ngan等[16]（1998）低低低低低低低低
Cozza等[24]（2010）低低低低低低低低
Westwood等[20]（2003）低低低低低低低低
Pavoni等[21]（2019低低低低低低低低

Tab 3

Results of sensitive analysis"

结局指标异质性检验结果效应模型Meta分析结果
P值I2/%WMD（95%CI）P值
T1-T2SNA0.750固定1.74 （1.31，2.17）<0.000 01
SNB0.540固定-1.87 （-2.19，-1.55）<0.000 01
ANB0.385固定3.32 （2.88，3.77）<0.000 01
Co-A0.1740固定1.07 （0.36，1.77）0.003
Co-Gn0.780固定-2.47 （-3.25，-1.69）<0.000 01
SN-GoGn0.2426固定-0.21 （-1.07，0.66）0.64
T2-T3SNA0.610固定-0.92 （-1.35，-0.49）<0.000 1
SNB0.450固定-0.40 （-0.79，-0.01）0.05
ANB0.411固定-0.40 （-0.76，-0.04）0.03
Co-A0.430固定-0.49 （-1.17，0.18）0.15
Co-Gn0.990固定-1.33 （-2.38，-0.28）0.01
SN-GoGn0.480固定-0.52 （-1.36，0.32）0.22
T1-T3SNA0.2130固定0. 60 （0.06，1.15）0.03
SNB0.000 378固定-0.78 （-1.04，-0.52）<0.000 01
ANB0.0848固定2.19 （1.73，2.65）<0.000 01
Co-A0.780固定1.36 （0.10，2.61）0.03
Co-Gn0.980固定-3.18 （-4.89，-1.46）0.000 3
SN-GoGn0.2038固定-0. 98 （-2.27，0.31）0.14
1 Emrich RE, Brodie AG, Blayney JR. Prevalence of Class 1, Class 2, and Class 3 malocclusions (Angle) in an urban population. An epidemiological study[J]. J Dent Res, 1965, 44(5): 947-953.
2 Thilander B, Myrberg N. The prevalence of malocclusion in Swedish schoolchildren[J]. Scand J Dent Res, 1973, 81(1): 12-21.
3 傅民魁, 张丁, 王邦康, 等. 中国25 392名儿童与青少年错𬌗畸形患病率的调查[J]. 中华口腔医学杂志, 2002(5): 371-373.
Fu MK, Zhang D, Wang BK, et al. The prevalence of malocclusion in China-an investigation of 25 392 children[J]. Chin J Stomatol, 2002(5): 371-373.
4 Strang RH. Differences between the facial skeletal patterns of Class Ⅲ malocclusion and normal occlusion[J]. Angle Orthod, 1955, 25(4): 208-222.
5 Gallagher RW, Miranda F, Buschang PH. Maxillary protraction: treatment and posttreatment effects[J]. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop, 1998, 113(6): 612-619.
6 Sugawara J, Asano T, Endo N, et al. Long-term effects of chincap therapy on skeletal profile in mandibular prognathism[J]. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop, 1990, 98(2): 127-133.
7 赵果, 李沙, 常彬彬. Frankel-Ⅲ矫治器矫治替牙期Angle Ⅲ类错𬌗的软组织变化[J]. 上海口腔医学, 2011(2): 201-203.
Zhao G, Li S, Chang BB. Soft tissue profile changes by Frankel-Ⅲ appliance on correcting Angle Class Ⅲ malocclusion in mixed dentition[J]. Shanghai J Stomatol, 2011(2): 201-203.
8 Rutili V, Nieri M, Giuntini V, et al. A multilevel analysis of craniofacial growth in subjects with untreated Class Ⅲ malocclusion[J]. Orthod Craniofacial Res, 2020, 23(2): 181-191.
9 Adolphs N, Ernst N, Keeve E, et al. Contemporary correction of dentofacial anomalies: a clinical assessment[J]. Dent J (Basel), 2016, 4(2): 11.
10 Oppenheim A. A possibility for physiologic orthodontic movement[J]. Dent Rec, 1945, 65: 278-280.
11 Palma JC, Tejedor-Sanz N, Oteo MD, et al. Long-term stability of rapid maxillary expansion combined with chincup protraction followed by fixed appliances[J]. Angle Orthod, 2015, 85(2): 270-277.
12 Mandall N, Cousley R, DiBiase A, et al. Early Class Ⅲ protraction facemask treatment reduces the need for orthognathic surgery: a multi-centre, two-arm parallel randomized, controlled trial[J]. J Orthod, 2016, 43(3): 164-175.
13 Lee WC, Shieh YS, Liao YF, et al. Long-term maxillary three dimensional changes following maxillary protraction with or without expansion: a systematic review and meta-analysis[J]. J Dent Sci, 2021, 16(1): 168-177.
14 杨智荣, 孙凤, 詹思延. 偏倚风险评估系列: (二)平行设计随机对照试验偏倚评估工具2.0介绍[J]. 中华流行病学杂志, 2017(9): 1285-1291.
Yang ZR, Sun F, Zhan SY. Risk on bias assessment: (2) revised Cochrane risk of bias tool for individually randomized, parallel group trials (ROB2.0)[J]. Chin J Epidemiol, 2017(9): 1285-1291.
15 Sterne JA, Hernán MA, Reeves BC, et al. ROBINS-Ⅰ: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions[J]. BMJ, 2016, 355: i4919.
16 Ngan P, Yiu C, Hu A, et al. Cephalometric and occlusal changes following maxillary expansion and protraction[J]. Eur J Orthod, 1998, 20(3): 237-254.
17 Macdonald KE, Kapust AJ, Turley PK. Cephalometric changes after the correction of Class Ⅲ malocclusion with maxillary expansion/facemask therapy[J]. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 1999, 116(1): 13-24.
18 Chong YH, Ive JC, Artun J. Changes following the use of protraction headgear for early correction of Class Ⅲ malocclusion[J]. Angle Orthod,1996, 66(5): 351-362.
19 Anne Mandall N, Cousley R, DiBiase A, et al. Is early Class Ⅲ protraction facemask treatment effective? A multicentre, randomized, controlled trial: 3-year follow-up[J]. J Orthod, 2012, 39(3): 176-185.
20 Westwood PV, McNamara JA Jr, Baccetti T, et al. Long-term effects of Class Ⅲ treatment with rapid maxillary expansion and facemask therapy followed by fixed appliances[J]. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 2003, 123(3): 306-320.
21 Pavoni C, Gazzani F, Franchi L, et al. Soft tissue facial profile in Class Ⅲ malocclusion: long-term post-pubertal effects produced by the face mask protocol[J]. Eur J Orthod, 2019, 41(5): 531-536.
22 Masucci C, Franchi L, Defraia E, et al. Stability of rapid maxillary expansion and facemask therapy: a long-term controlled study[J]. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 2011, 140(4): 493-500.
23 Baccetti T, Franchi L, McNamara JA. Treatment and posttreatment craniofacial changes after rapid maxillary expansion and facemask therapy[J]. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop, 2000, 118(4): 404-413.
24 Cozza P, Baccetti T, Mucedero M, et al. Treatment and posttreatment effects of a facial mask combined with a bite-block appliance in Class Ⅲ malocclusion[J]. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 2010, 138(3): 300-310.
25 Baccetti T, Franchi L, Mucedero M, et al. Treatment and post-treatment effects of facemask therapy on the sagittal pharyngeal dimensions in Class Ⅲ subjects[J]. Eur J Orthod, 2010, 32(3): 346-350.
26 Jackson GW, Kokich VG, Shapiro PA. Experimental and postexperimental response to anteriorly directed extraoral force in young Macaca nemestrina[J]. Am J Orthod, 1979, 75(3): 318-333.
27 Franchi L, Pavoni C, Cerroni S, et al. Thin-plate spline analysis of mandibular morphological changes induced by early Class Ⅲ treatment: a long-term evaluation[J]. Eur J Orthod, 2014, 36(4): 425-430.
28 Meazzini MC, Torre C, Cappello A, et al. Long-term follow-up of late maxillary orthopedic advancement with the Liou-Alternate rapid maxillary expansion-constriction technique in patients with skeletal Class Ⅲ malocclusion[J]. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 2021, 160(2): 221-230.
29 Tripathi T, Rai P, Singh N, et al. A comparative evaluation of skeletal, dental, and soft tissue changes with skeletal anchored and conventional facemask protraction therapy[J]. J Orthod Sci, 2016, 5(3): 92-99.
[1] Xu Shukui,Zhang Shan,Xie Xinyu,Ma Wensheng.. Progress in research into the long-term stability of maxillary protraction therapy in skeletal class Ⅲ malocclusion [J]. Int J Stomatol, 2023, 50(6): 646-652.
[2] Gong Jiaming,Zhao Ruimin,Pan Hongwei,Lang Xin,Yu Zhanhai,Li Jianxue. Meta-analysis of dynamic navigation versus static navigation in the accuracy of implant surgery [J]. Int J Stomatol, 2023, 50(5): 538-551.
[3] revascularization Meta-analysis of the efficacy comparison between endodontic,Zhuanzhuan apexification Li. OSID） [J]. Int J Stomatol, 2023, 50(2): 177-185.
[4] Li Peitong,Shi Binmian,Xu Chunmei,Xie Xudong,Wang Jun.. Distribution and role of Gli1+ mesenchymal stem cells in teeth and periodontal tissues [J]. Int J Stomatol, 2023, 50(1): 37-42.
[5] Zhang Yuning,Zeng Ni,Zhang Bei,Shi Bing,Zheng Qian.. A preliminary study of the effect of posterior pharyngeal flap surgery on the maxillofacial growth of patients after palatoplasty [J]. Int J Stomatol, 2023, 50(1): 66-71.
[6] Gong Jiaming,Zhao Ruimin,Li Wanxin,Su Linhan,Yu Zhanhai,Li Jianxue. The socket-shield technique for immediate implant placement： a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials [J]. Int J Stomatol, 2022, 49(5): 537-547.
[7] Ma Yu,Zuo Yu,Zhang Xin. Photodynamic therapy as an adjunct to periodontitis: a meta-analysis [J]. Int J Stomatol, 2022, 49(3): 305-316.
[8] Yang Yunqi,Lin Yangyang,Hou Min. Research advances on jaw stability and influencing factors in surgery-first approach [J]. Int J Stomatol, 2022, 49(2): 227-232.
[9] Zhou Wanhang,Li Yanfei,Xu Ricong,Wan Qijun. Effects of non-surgical periodontal treatment on risk factors of chronic kidney disease and systematic inflammatory levels in patients with chronic kidney disease and periodontal disease: a Meta-analysis [J]. Int J Stomatol, 2021, 48(5): 528-535.
[10] Liu Jiacheng,Meng Zhaosong,Li Hongjie,Sui Lei. The role of follistatin in oral and maxillofacial development and its therapeutic application prospect [J]. Int J Stomatol, 2021, 48(5): 556-562.
[11] Zhang Shizhen,Lai Wenli. Research progress on maxillary protraction methods and auxiliary maxillary expansion for skeletal Class Ⅲ malocclusion [J]. Int J Stomatol, 2021, 48(3): 354-361.
[12] Qin Xiaoru,Liu Mengyuan. Association between periodontal disease and myocardial infarction: a Meta-analysis of cohort studies [J]. Int J Stomatol, 2021, 48(2): 165-172.
[13] Liu Ling,Gong Renguo,Dong Xiuhua,Liu Rumeng. Meta-analysis of the long-term stability of serious anterior skeletal open-bite malocclusion after orthodontic surgery [J]. Int J Stomatol, 2021, 48(2): 173-179.
[14] Jin Zuolin. Craniofacial growth and development in early orthodontic and orthopedic treatment [J]. Int J Stomatol, 2021, 48(1): 7-11.
[15] Wang Shiqi,Chang Yaqin,Chen Bin,Tan Baochun,Ni Yanhong. Comparison of clinical outcomes between using bone graft alone and the combination of bone graft with membrane for periodontal regeneration therapy: a systematic review and Meta-analysis [J]. Int J Stomatol, 2020, 47(6): 644-651.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
  Discussed   
[1] . [J]. Foreign Med Sci: Stomatol, 1999, 26(06): .
[2] . [J]. Foreign Med Sci: Stomatol, 1999, 26(05): .
[3] . [J]. Foreign Med Sci: Stomatol, 1999, 26(05): .
[4] . [J]. Foreign Med Sci: Stomatol, 1999, 26(05): .
[5] . [J]. Foreign Med Sci: Stomatol, 1999, 26(05): .
[6] . [J]. Foreign Med Sci: Stomatol, 1999, 26(04): .
[7] . [J]. Foreign Med Sci: Stomatol, 2005, 32(06): 458 -460 .
[8] . [J]. Foreign Med Sci: Stomatol, 2005, 32(06): 452 -454 .
[9] . [J]. Inter J Stomatol, 2008, 35(S1): .
[10] . [J]. Inter J Stomatol, 2008, 35(S1): .