Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29761706›Full record

ArticleThe Angle orthodontist2018

Genotoxic and cytotoxic effects of Haas appliance in exfoliated buccal mucosa cells during orthodontic treatment.

Arthur S Cunha, Willian Orlando Castillo, Catarina Satie Takahashi, Erika Calvano Küchler, Raquel Assed Bezerra Segato, Léa Assed Bezerra da Silva, Fábio Lourenço Romano, Mírian Aiko Nakane Matsumoto, Paulo Nelson-Filho

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Angle orthodontist, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Biological Consequences and Assessment Methods Analysis of Fixed Orthodontic Appliances on Oral Epithelial Cells: A Systematic Review.Journal of oral pathology & medicine : official publication of the International Association of Oral Pathologists and the American Academy of Oral Pathology · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Arthur S Cunha
Willian Orlando Castillo
Catarina Satie Takahashi
Erika Calvano Küchler
Raquel Assed Bezerra Segato
Léa Assed Bezerra da Silva
Fábio Lourenço Romano
Mírian Aiko Nakane Matsumoto
Paulo Nelson-Filho

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesTo evaluate the genotoxic and cytotoxic effects of Haas appliances through micronuclei test and cytogenetic damage analysis in buccal mucosa epithelial cells of patients undergoing orthodontic treatment. MATERIALS AND

methodsTwenty-eight patients, 6-12 years of age and of both genders, who required a Haas appliance for the correction of a posterior crossbite were included. Epithelial cells from the mucosa were collected by gently scraping the inside of both the right and left cheeks. The cells were collected before the insertion of the appliance (T0), 1 month after the device was installed (T1), and again 3 months after the appliance was immobilized (T2). The cells were processed to obtain slides. Feulgen/Fast Green was used as the staining method, and the number of normal, karyolytic, pyknotic, nuclear buds, bi/trinucleated, and micronucleus cells were counted under light microscopy. Cellular abnormalities were evaluated with parametric and nonparametric tests for comparison of the means by analysis of variance testing, Tukey posttest, or the Kruskal-Wallis test and then by Dunn's posttest. The significance level was 5%.

resultsThere were no statistically significant changes in the micronuclei in the evaluated periods ( P > .05). Nuclear buds increased at T1 ( P < .05), returning to baseline levels at T2. Other abnormalities (cariolytic, pyknotic, and bi/trinucleated cells) showed a significant increase at T1 and T2 ( P < .0001).

conclusionsThe Haas appliance did not cause an increase in micronuclei in cells of the buccal mucosa. However, statistically significant increases in cariolytic, pyknotic, and bi/trinucleated cells were observed during treatment, suggesting possible DNA damage.

Indexed as

ChildDNA DamageFemaleHumansMaleMalocclusionMicronucleus TestsMouth MucosaOrthodontic Appliances, FixedPalatal Expansion TechniqueCytogeneticGenotoxicityMicronucleus testsPalatal expansion technique

Identifiers

PMID29761706
PMCPMC8183133

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.