Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research ›› 2012, Vol. 16 ›› Issue (21): 3881-3885.doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1673-8225.2012.21.019

Previous Articles     Next Articles

Meta analysis of micro-screw implant anchorage and extra-oral anchorage in the perioperatively orthodontic treatment for maxillary or bimaxillary protrusion

Yue Shi-chao1, Du Yue-hua1, Tang Xiao-jun2, Ren Yuan-shu1, Qin Pu1, Wang Mao-qing1, Li Xiao-xia1, Deng Jia-shu1, Liu Xun1   

  1. 1Department of Stomatology, Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing  400012, China; 2School of Public Health and Management, Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing  400012, China
  • Received:2012-01-17 Revised:2012-03-05 Online:2012-05-20 Published:2012-05-20
  • Contact: Tang Xiao-jun, Professor, School of Public Health and Management, Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing 400012, China
  • About author:Yue Shi-chao★, Studying for master’s degree, Physician, Department of Stomatology, Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing 400012, China yue.shichao868@163.com

PDF

629

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: Several studies have shown that micro-screw implant anchorage can retract maxillary protrusion to the maximum extent based on extraction space compared with common anchorage.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of micro-screw implant anchorage and extra-oral anchorage on patients with maxillary or bimaxillary protrusion.
METHODS: The CNKI, Wanfang, CSCD, CBM, Cochrane library, Medline and PubMed databases were searched. The randomized/semi-randomized controlled and the before-after controlled trials concerning micro-screw implant anchorage and extra-oral anchorage in orthodontic treatment for patients with maxillary or bimaxillary protrusion were included for Meta analysis.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: Totally six articles and 229 cases were included. Of all the cases, there were 116 cases in micro-screw implant anchorage group and 113 cases in extra-oral anchorage group. There were significant differences in SNA°, UL-E Plane and NLA° (P < 0.05), and there were no significant differences in SN-MP, U1-SN°and G-Sn-Pg° between the two groups (P > 0.85). These findings suggest that compared with extra-oral anchorage, micro-screw implant anchorage can behave better in the aspects of SNA°, UL-E Plane and NLA°. There are significant differences in terms of SN-MP°, U1-SN°and G-Sn-Pg°, but more qualified randomized controlled trials are required to provide better basis.

CLC Number: