IADR Abstract Archives
Temporary Anchorage Devices (TADs) using CBCT/2D Radiography: A Systematic Review
Objectives: This systematic review aims to evaluate the evidence from dental literature regarding TAD placement utilizing either 3D or 2D radiographs, provide an objective assessment comparing the two techniques and evaluate the safety outcomes based on their use.
Methods: Indexed publications from 2000 to 2019 pertaining to the subject were electronically searched in PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus using key words and search strategies. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) was used to extract the evidence-based information from the published literature. A PRISMA flow-chart was developed. Data from the two articles was tabulated using an Excel spread sheet and was analyzed for the technique used, location and number of TADS placed and their outcomes. Descriptive statistics were used to interpret the results.
Results: Out of 302 articles, 300 were excluded based on the criteria used. Only 2 articles remained that compared TAD placement using both CBCT imaging and 2D radiographs. Out of 40 (24 maxillary and 16 mandibular) TADs placed in one study, 15% of TADs placed using 2D imaging contacted root surfaces and 5% failed due to lack of bone support. For CBCT based TADs, there was 0% contact or failure recorded. In another study, out of a total of 190 (132 maxillary and 58 mandibular) TADs placed, 60% contacted root surface when only 2D imaging was used. When CBCT was employed, only 13% contacted the root surface. A new scoring system was developed to compare CBCT and 2D imaging-based TAD placement.
Conclusions: CBCT imaging consistently results in more successful TAD placement and least incidence of injury to neighboring teeth and should be considered the standard of care for such procedures in Orthodontics.
Methods: Indexed publications from 2000 to 2019 pertaining to the subject were electronically searched in PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus using key words and search strategies. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) was used to extract the evidence-based information from the published literature. A PRISMA flow-chart was developed. Data from the two articles was tabulated using an Excel spread sheet and was analyzed for the technique used, location and number of TADS placed and their outcomes. Descriptive statistics were used to interpret the results.
Results: Out of 302 articles, 300 were excluded based on the criteria used. Only 2 articles remained that compared TAD placement using both CBCT imaging and 2D radiographs. Out of 40 (24 maxillary and 16 mandibular) TADs placed in one study, 15% of TADs placed using 2D imaging contacted root surfaces and 5% failed due to lack of bone support. For CBCT based TADs, there was 0% contact or failure recorded. In another study, out of a total of 190 (132 maxillary and 58 mandibular) TADs placed, 60% contacted root surface when only 2D imaging was used. When CBCT was employed, only 13% contacted the root surface. A new scoring system was developed to compare CBCT and 2D imaging-based TAD placement.
Conclusions: CBCT imaging consistently results in more successful TAD placement and least incidence of injury to neighboring teeth and should be considered the standard of care for such procedures in Orthodontics.
3323282_File000000.jpg