Periodontal results of different therapeutic approaches (open vs. closed technique) and timing evaluation (< 2 year vs. > 2 year) of palatal impacted canines: a systematic review

Abstract Background This review evaluates, as a primary outcome, which surgical technique (open vs. closed) and which type of material used for the auxiliaries (elastic vs. metallic) were preferable in terms of periodontal results during the treatment of palatal-impacted canines. The timing of the e...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales:	Rosanna Guarnieri, Serena Bertoldo, Michele Cassetta, Federica Altieri, Camilla Grenga, Maurizio Vichi, Roberto Di Giorgio, Ersilia Barbato
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	BMC 2021
Materias:	Palatal impacted canine Surgical approach Periodontal results Therapeutic methods Dentistry RK1-715
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/444309efb4c84c4286b24c109dd4842e
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:444309efb4c84c4286b24c109dd4842e
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:444309efb4c84c4286b24c109dd4842e2021-11-14T12:32:17ZPeriodontal results of different therapeutic approaches (open vs. closed technique) and timing evaluation (< 2 year vs. > 2 year) of palatal impacted canines: a systematic review10.1186/s12903-021-01937-x1472-6831https://doaj.org/article/444309efb4c84c4286b24c109dd4842e2021-11-01T00:00:00Zhttps://doi.org/10.1186/s12903-021-01937-xhttps://doaj.org/toc/1472-6831Abstract Background This review evaluates, as a primary outcome, which surgical technique (open vs. closed) and which type of material used for the auxiliaries (elastic vs. metallic) were preferable in terms of periodontal results during the treatment of palatal-impacted canines. The timing of the evaluation of the results was also assessed as a secondary outcome. Methods An electronic search of the literature up to March 2021 was performed on Pubmed, MEDLINE (via Pubmed), EMBASE (via Ovid), Cochrane Reviews and Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials (RCTs) (CENTRAL). The risk of bias evaluation was performed using version 2 of the Cochrane risk of bias tool (RoB 2) for RCTs and the ACROBAT NRSI tool of Cochrane for non-RCTs. Results 11 articles met the inclusion criteria. Only one RCT was assessed as having a low risk of bias and all the non-RCTs were assessed as having a serious risk of bias. This review revealed better periodontal results for the closed technique and metallic auxiliaries. In addition, it revealed that the timing of the evaluation of the results affects the periodontal results with better results obtained 2 years after the end of treatment. Conclusion In the treatment of a palatal-impacted canine, the closed technique and metallic auxiliaries should be preferred in terms of better periodontal results. The timing of the evaluation of the results affects the periodontal results.Rosanna GuarnieriSerena BertoldoMichele CassettaFederica AltieriCamilla GrengaMaurizio VichiRoberto Di GiorgioErsilia BarbatoBMCarticlePalatal impacted canineSurgical approachPeriodontal resultsTherapeutic methodsDentistryRK1-715ENBMC Oral Health, Vol 21, Iss 1, Pp 1-13 (2021)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Palatal impacted canine Surgical approach Periodontal results Therapeutic methods Dentistry RK1-715
spellingShingle	Palatal impacted canine Surgical approach Periodontal results Therapeutic methods Dentistry RK1-715 Rosanna Guarnieri Serena Bertoldo Michele Cassetta Federica Altieri Camilla Grenga Maurizio Vichi Roberto Di Giorgio Ersilia Barbato Periodontal results of different therapeutic approaches (open vs. closed technique) and timing evaluation (< 2 year vs. > 2 year) of palatal impacted canines: a systematic review
description	Abstract Background This review evaluates, as a primary outcome, which surgical technique (open vs. closed) and which type of material used for the auxiliaries (elastic vs. metallic) were preferable in terms of periodontal results during the treatment of palatal-impacted canines. The timing of the evaluation of the results was also assessed as a secondary outcome. Methods An electronic search of the literature up to March 2021 was performed on Pubmed, MEDLINE (via Pubmed), EMBASE (via Ovid), Cochrane Reviews and Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials (RCTs) (CENTRAL). The risk of bias evaluation was performed using version 2 of the Cochrane risk of bias tool (RoB 2) for RCTs and the ACROBAT NRSI tool of Cochrane for non-RCTs. Results 11 articles met the inclusion criteria. Only one RCT was assessed as having a low risk of bias and all the non-RCTs were assessed as having a serious risk of bias. This review revealed better periodontal results for the closed technique and metallic auxiliaries. In addition, it revealed that the timing of the evaluation of the results affects the periodontal results with better results obtained 2 years after the end of treatment. Conclusion In the treatment of a palatal-impacted canine, the closed technique and metallic auxiliaries should be preferred in terms of better periodontal results. The timing of the evaluation of the results affects the periodontal results.
format	article
author	Rosanna Guarnieri Serena Bertoldo Michele Cassetta Federica Altieri Camilla Grenga Maurizio Vichi Roberto Di Giorgio Ersilia Barbato
author_facet	Rosanna Guarnieri Serena Bertoldo Michele Cassetta Federica Altieri Camilla Grenga Maurizio Vichi Roberto Di Giorgio Ersilia Barbato
author_sort	Rosanna Guarnieri
title	Periodontal results of different therapeutic approaches (open vs. closed technique) and timing evaluation (< 2 year vs. > 2 year) of palatal impacted canines: a systematic review
title_short	Periodontal results of different therapeutic approaches (open vs. closed technique) and timing evaluation (< 2 year vs. > 2 year) of palatal impacted canines: a systematic review
title_full	Periodontal results of different therapeutic approaches (open vs. closed technique) and timing evaluation (< 2 year vs. > 2 year) of palatal impacted canines: a systematic review
title_fullStr	Periodontal results of different therapeutic approaches (open vs. closed technique) and timing evaluation (< 2 year vs. > 2 year) of palatal impacted canines: a systematic review
title_full_unstemmed	Periodontal results of different therapeutic approaches (open vs. closed technique) and timing evaluation (< 2 year vs. > 2 year) of palatal impacted canines: a systematic review
title_sort	periodontal results of different therapeutic approaches (open vs. closed technique) and timing evaluation (< 2 year vs. > 2 year) of palatal impacted canines: a systematic review
publisher	BMC
publishDate	2021
url	https://doaj.org/article/444309efb4c84c4286b24c109dd4842e
work_keys_str_mv	AT rosannaguarnieri periodontalresultsofdifferenttherapeuticapproachesopenvsclosedtechniqueandtimingevaluation2yearvs2yearofpalatalimpactedcaninesasystematicreview AT serenabertoldo periodontalresultsofdifferenttherapeuticapproachesopenvsclosedtechniqueandtimingevaluation2yearvs2yearofpalatalimpactedcaninesasystematicreview AT michelecassetta periodontalresultsofdifferenttherapeuticapproachesopenvsclosedtechniqueandtimingevaluation2yearvs2yearofpalatalimpactedcaninesasystematicreview AT federicaaltieri periodontalresultsofdifferenttherapeuticapproachesopenvsclosedtechniqueandtimingevaluation2yearvs2yearofpalatalimpactedcaninesasystematicreview AT camillagrenga periodontalresultsofdifferenttherapeuticapproachesopenvsclosedtechniqueandtimingevaluation2yearvs2yearofpalatalimpactedcaninesasystematicreview AT mauriziovichi periodontalresultsofdifferenttherapeuticapproachesopenvsclosedtechniqueandtimingevaluation2yearvs2yearofpalatalimpactedcaninesasystematicreview AT robertodigiorgio periodontalresultsofdifferenttherapeuticapproachesopenvsclosedtechniqueandtimingevaluation2yearvs2yearofpalatalimpactedcaninesasystematicreview AT ersiliabarbato periodontalresultsofdifferenttherapeuticapproachesopenvsclosedtechniqueandtimingevaluation2yearvs2yearofpalatalimpactedcaninesasystematicreview
_version_	1718429162722557952

Periodontal results of different therapeutic approaches (open vs. closed technique) and timing evaluation (< 2 year vs. > 2 year) of palatal impacted canines: a systematic review

Ejemplares similares