Which anchorage device is the best during retraction of anterior teeth? An overview of systematic reviews

Yassir A. Yassir (Lead / Corresponding author), Sarah A. Nabbat, Grant T. McIntyre, David R. Bearn

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

5 Citations (Scopus)
150 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the available evidence regarding the clinical effectiveness of different types of anchorage devices.

Methods: A comprehensive literature search of different electronic databases was conducted for systematic reviews investigating different anchorage methods published up to April 15, 2021. Any ongoing systematic reviews were searched using PROSPERO, and a grey literature search was undertaken using Google Scholar and OpenGrey. No language restriction was applied. Screening, quality assessment, and data extraction were performed independently by two authors. Information was categorized and narratively synthesized for the key findings from moderate- and high-quality reviews.

Results: Fourteen systematic reviews were included (11 were of moderate/high quality). Skeletal anchorage with miniscrews was associated with less anchorage loss (and sometimes with anchorage gain). Similarly, skeletal anchorage was more effective in retracting anterior teeth and intruding incisors and molars, resulting in minor vertical skeletal changes and improvements in the soft tissue profile. However, insufficient evidence was obtained for the preference of any anchorage method in terms of the duration of treatment, number of appointments, quality of treatment, patient perception, or adverse effects. The effectiveness of skeletal anchorage can be enhanced when: directly loaded, used in the mandible rather than the maxilla, used buccally rather than palatally, using dual rather than single miniscrews, used for en-masse retraction, and in adults.

Conclusions: The level of evidence regarding anchorage effectiveness is moderate. Nevertheless, compared to conventional anchorage, skeletal anchorage can be used with more anchorage preservation. Further high-quality randomized clinical trials are required to confirm these findings.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)220-235
Number of pages16
JournalKorean Journal of Orthodontics
Volume52
Issue number3
Early online date14 Apr 2022
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 25 May 2022

Keywords

  • Orthodontic anchorage procedures
  • Anchorage loss
  • Orthodontic mini-implant

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Which anchorage device is the best during retraction of anterior teeth? An overview of systematic reviews'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this