Clinical outcomes of lingual orthodontic treatment: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVES To assess the available evidence on the effectiveness of lingual orthodontic treatment and related clinical parameters through a systematic review of relevant studies. MATERIALS AND METHODS Eligible clinical studies published from January 2000 to March 2015 were identified through electronic (five major databases) and hand searches. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool for prospective studies and a specially designed tool for retrospective studies. RESULTS From the 3734 articles identified by the search, after application of specific inclusion and exclusion criteria, 16 papers were included in the study. Eleven studies were retrospective, four were prospective, and only one was a RCT. In detail, six studies evaluated differences of the treatment outcome from the pre-treatment set-up prediction, two studies evaluated the effect of treatment on periodontal and microbial parameters, and 10 studies assessed various clinical treatment related parameters. Despite several promising findings, the quality of evidence supporting them was found to be low in most cases. CONCLUSIONS This systematic review showed encouraging results on the clinical outcome of lingual orthodontic treatment, especially in regards to the achievement of individualized treatment goals and the reduction of decalcifications on the bonded surfaces of the teeth. However, additional well-designed prospective clinical trials with larger samples are needed to confirm those findings. Several aspects of lingual orthodontic treatment were difficult to be conclusively evaluated due to the study design, the heterogeneity, the small samples sizes, and the high risk of bias seen in the majority of the included studies

Patterns of non-syndromic permanent tooth agenesis in a large orthodontic population

The aim of this study is to explore patterns of non-syndromic permanent tooth agenesis in a large orthodontic patient group.; A record review was performed in various orthodontic clinics to identify white patients with non-syndromic permanent tooth agenesis, excluding 3rd molars. Four hundred and fourteen subjects fulfilled the inclusion criteria.; In the 414 subjects with tooth agenesis, approximately 70% presented 1-2 missing teeth. Symmetric agenesis patterns were often observed in the sample (by jaw, by side, or crossed quadrants), with prevalence approaching 30% for cases with contralateral tooth agenesis within a jaw. In cases with 1 or 2 missing teeth, from the total number of potential tooth agenesis patterns in the sample, a certain part was evident, limiting the variation to 27.8% (44/158). In the entire sample, both in the maxilla and the mandible a certain incisor/premolar agenesis phenotype was observed in 59.0% of cases in isolated form.; Although there was variation in the tooth agenesis patterns, our findings suggest the involvement of particular genetic, epigenetic, and/or environmental factors in the formation of the entire dentition, which often lead to specific tooth agenesis phenotypes in cases where this process is disrupted. The present study provides a comprehensive categorization of orthodontic cases with tooth agenesis and can assist in planning future epidemiological and genetic studies

Patterns of non-syndromic permanent tooth agenesis in a large orthodontic population

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to explore patterns of non-syndromic permanent tooth agenesis in a large orthodontic patient group. DESIGN: A record review was performed in various orthodontic clinics to identify white patients with non-syndromic permanent tooth agenesis, excluding 3rd molars. Four hundred and fourteen subjects fulfilled the inclusion criteria. RESULTS: In the 414 subjects with tooth agenesis, approximately 70% presented 1-2 missing teeth. Symmetric agenesis patterns were often observed in the sample (by jaw, by side, or crossed quadrants), with prevalence approaching 30% for cases with contralateral tooth agenesis within a jaw. In cases with 1 or 2 missing teeth, from the total number of potential tooth agenesis patterns in the sample, a certain part was evident, limiting the variation to 27.8% (44/158). In the entire sample, both in the maxilla and the mandible a certain incisor/premolar agenesis phenotype was observed in 59.0% of cases in isolated form. CONCLUSIONS: Although there was variation in the tooth agenesis patterns, our findings suggest the involvement of particular genetic, epigenetic, and/or environmental factors in the formation of the entire dentition, which often lead to specific tooth agenesis phenotypes in cases where this process is disrupted. The present study provides a comprehensive categorization of orthodontic cases with tooth agenesis and can assist in planning future epidemiological and genetic studies