ArticleDental research journal2023
The effect of micro-osteoperforation on root resorption, pulp vitality, and biological changes of teeth subjected to orthodontic tooth movement: A systematic review study.
Article in Dental research journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Micro-osteoperforation for accelerating orthodontic tooth movement: a meta-analysis of short-term efficacy, safety, and optimal application parameters.Frontiers in dental medicine · 2026Review
- Selective modulation of the bone remodeling regulatory system through orthodontic tooth movement-a review.Frontiers in oral health · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: These days minimally invasive micro-osteoperforation (MOPs) has accelerated orthodontic tooth movement (OTM). However, there are some conflicting reports about their various impacts; hence, the present systematic review study aimed to evaluate the effect of MOP on root resorption, pulp vitality, and the biological changes of teeth subjected to OTM. Materials and Methods: Search in electronic databases of English literature including PubMed, Scopus, Web of sciences, Cochrane, and Google scholar as well as a manual search was performed from 2013 to 2022. Most of the studies included in this article were randomized controlled trials. Results: From the total number of 321 found articles, 31 duplicated and 268 irrelevant articles were excluded regarding the defined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Consequently, 22 articles were subjected to the quality assessment process, and finally, 18 articles were selected for the review phase. Root resorption during tooth movement using the MOP approach was reported only in one study. Besides, except for two animal studies, all of the relevant included articles showed that MOPs significantly increased the expression of some inflammatory biomarkers known to recruit osteoclast precursors and increase the number of osteoclast cells. On the other hand, two animal studies showed no differences in osteoclast counts by using MOPs in comparison to their control groups, which was consequently the result of biologic variability between animal and human and also probably the small sample sizes of these two studies. Conclusion: In this systematic review, according to the adverse effects of MOP on root resorption, one study showed higher levels of root resorption among patients undergoing MOP. However, this outcome was due to the different methods used to evaluate the effect of MOPs on root resorption. Moreover, a high certainty of evidence supports that MOP causes biological changes and an elevation in cytokines, chemokines, and other biomarkers that stimulates osteoclasts differentiation which in turn accelerate OTM. There was no change in pulp vitality status based on available evidence.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37304419PMC10247875What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.