|Baltic Dental and Maxillofacial Journal|
September, 2018, Vol. 20, No. 3
Correlation of temporomandibular joint clinical signs with cone beam computed tomography radiologic
features in juvenile idiopathic arthritis patients
Maxillary Central Incisor Root Resorption due to Canine Impaction after Trauma. Is the Canine Substitution for Maxillary Incisors a suitable Treatment Option? Two Case Reports
© 2018 Stomatologija
Stomatologija 2018; 20 (3): 66-72 496 KB
Comparison of skeletal anchorage distalizers effect in maxillary buccal segment: A systematic review
Lior Levin*, Arūnas Vasiliauskas*, Juste Armalaite*, Kristina Kubiliute*
Objective. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate and compare distalization effect in maxillary buccal segment between Palatal Skeletal Anchorage (PSA) and Zygoma Gear Appliance (ZGA) in evidence-based way.
Materials and Methods. Relevant studies published between January 2007 till December 2017 in PubMed, ScienceDirect, AJO-DO and Scopus electronic databases were identified. Inclusion criteria were: English language, study performed on humans, randomized or nonrandomized clinical trials, assessment of buccal segment distalization by Palatal or Zygomatic skeletal anchorage and patient's clinical preoperative and post-operative evaluation measured by cephalometric analysis. Quality assessment of included studies was performed.
Results. A total of 357 scientific publications, articles, clinical trials related to the used keywords were identified during the search. Thirteen articles fulfilled our inclusion criteria. PSA system showed maxillary molar distalization distance range between 1.8 mm to 6 mm. ZGA presented molar distalization range from 4.37 mm to 5.31 mm. Results of maxillary buccal segment distal movement distance, treatment duration, adverse treatment effects or failure of mini-implants and the appliance were evaluated.
Conclusion. There was evidence that both of skeletal anchorage systems are effective nonextractive therapy for Angle Class II malocclusion and maxillary buccal segment distalization in greater than 3 mm space deficiency.
Key words: orthodontic implant, skeletal anchorage device, molar distalization.
Received: 17 07S 2017
Accepted for publishing: 20 09 2018
*Clinic of Orthodontics, Faculty of Odontology, Lithuanian University of Health Sciences, Kaunas, Lithuania Address correspondence to Arūnas Vasiliauskas, Clinic of Orthodontics, Faculty of Odontology, Lithuanian University of Health Sciences, J. Lukšos-Daumanto g. 6, LT-3009 Kaunas, Lithuania.
E-mail address: firstname.lastname@example.org