Comparison of the effects of mini-implant and traditional anchorage on patients with maxillary dentoalveolar protrusion.
OBJECTIVE
To compare the treatment effects of mini-implants as anchor units with conventional methods of anchorage reinforcement in maxillary dentoalveolar protrusion patients in terms of skeletal, dental, and soft tissue changes.


METHODS
We searched the databases of the Cochrane Library, PubMed, OVIDSP, CBM, VIP, WanFang Data, and CNKI covering December 1966 to March 2016 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and clinical controlled trials that compared the treatment effects of mini-implants with conventional anchorage reinforcement in maxillary dentoalveolar protrusion patients. Literature filtering, data extraction, and methodological quality evaluation were finished independently by two researchers and disagreements were solved by discussion. Meta-analysis was performed when possible; otherwise descriptive assessment was done.


RESULTS
Through a predefined search strategy, we finally included 14 eligible studies. Eight outcomes were evaluated in this study: maxillary incisor retraction, maxillary molar movement, U1-SN, SNA, SN-MP, UL-E Plane, NLA and G-Sn-Pg.


CONCLUSIONS
Mini-implant anchorage was more effective in retracting the anterior teeth, produced less anchorage loss, and had a greater effect on SN-MP for the high-angle patients than did traditional anchorage. Both mini-implants and traditional anchorage underwent decreases in on U1-SN and SNA. More qualified RCTs are required to make reliable recommendations about the anchorage capacity of mini-implant and traditional anchorage in patients with maxillary dentoalveolar protrusion, especially on the UL-E plane, NLA, and G-Sn-Pg.
Yanhua
Y
Xu
Jiye
J
Xie
D015921:Dental Implants; D017267:Dental Prosthesis Design; D006801:Humans; D008437:Maxilla; D052280:Orthodontic Anchorage Procedures / Q000295:instrumentation*; D014087:Tooth Movement Techniques / Q000295:instrumentation*
D015921:Dental Implants
Implant; Protrusion; Systematic review; Traditional anchorage
Int J Orthod Milwaukee. 2013 Spring;24(1):19-24
23729133
Control Clin Trials. 1996 Feb;17(1):1-12
8721797
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2008 Dec;134(6):803-10
19061808
Eur J Orthod. 2014 Jun;36(3):275-83
23787192
J Oral Rehabil. 2009 Sep;36(9):687-95
19602104
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2015 Apr;147(4):465-71
25836006
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2008 Nov;134(5):615-24
18984393
Angle Orthod. 2011 Sep;81(5):915-22
21299412
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2009 Mar;135(3):302-9
19268827
Eur J Orthod. 2011 Apr;33(2):126-31
21059875
Eur J Orthod. 2008 Jun;30(3):283-7
18540016
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2008 Nov;134(5):636-45
18984395
Am J Orthod. 1982 Aug;82(2):141-9
6961784
Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg. 1998;13(3):201-9
9835819
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2008 Apr;133(4):593-600
18405824
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2008 Jul;134(1):18-29.e1
18617099
Angle Orthod. 1997;67(1):23-30
9046396