Dental movement acceleration: Literature review by an alternative scientific evidence method

Abstract

The aim of this study was to analyze the majority of publications using effective methods to speed up orthodontic treatment and determine which publications carry high evidence-based value. The literature published in Pubmed from 1984 to 2013 was reviewed, in addition to well-known reports that were not classified under this database. To facilitate evidence-based decision making, guidelines such as the Consolidation Standards of Reporting Trials, Preferred Reporting items for systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses, and Transparent Reporting of Evaluations with Non-randomized Designs check list were used. The studies were initially divided into three groups: local application of cell mediators, physical stimuli, and techniques that took advantage of the regional acceleration phenomena. The articles were classified according to their level of evidence using an alternative method for orthodontic scientific article classification. 1a: Systematic Reviews (SR) of randomized clinical trials (RCTs), 1b: Individual RCT, 2a: SR of cohort studies, 2b: Individual cohort study, controlled clinical trials and low quality RCT, 3a: SR of case-control studies, 3b: Individual case-control study, low quality cohort study and short time following split mouth designs. 4: Case-series, low quality case-control study and non-systematic review, and 5: Expert opinion. The highest level of evidence for each group was: (1) local application of cell mediators: the highest level of evidence corresponds to a 3B level in Prostaglandins and Vitamin D; (2) physical stimuli: vibratory forces and low level laser irradiation have evidence level 2b, Electrical current is classified as 3b evidence-based level, Pulsed Electromagnetic Field is placed on the 4^th level on the evidence scale; and (3) regional acceleration phenomena related techniques: for corticotomy the majority of the reports belong to level 4. Piezocision, dentoalveolar distraction, alveocentesis, monocortical tooth dislocation and ligament distraction technique, only had case series or single report cases (4^th level of evidence). Surgery first and periodontal distraction have 1 study at level 2b and corticision one report at level 5. Multiple orthodontic acceleration reports on humans were identified by an alternative evidence level scale, which is a simple and accurate way of determining which techniques are better and have a higher rate of effectiveness. The highest level of evidence for a specific procedure to accelerate orthodontic dental movement up to October 2013 was surgery first followed by low level laser application, corticotomy and periodontal distraction located on level 2, recommendation grade b from this proposed scientific evidence-based scale.

Keywords: Orthodontic movement, Evidence-based dentistry, Dental movement acceleration

Core tip: Orthodontic systematic reviews of randomized clinical trials, meta analysis and meta analysis network are difficult to develop due to a lack of high quality randomized clinical trials related to orthodontic therapies. The correct classification of the scientific literature following the evidence-based hierarchy facilitates the answers to specific clinical questions, and thus its application in every scientific subject. The resources available to speed up orthodontic movement had been widely examined. Due to a lack of evidence-based strength, the latter method cannot be taken into account in clinical protocols, thus we are left with the main already clinically proven methods: local injection of cellular mediators, physical stimuli, and surgically assisted orthodontics.