ReviewCureus2024
Evaluation of Treatment Effects of en Masse Mandibular Arch Distalization Using Skeletal Temporary Anchorage Devices: A Systematic Review.
Review in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Dentofacial changes following four premolar extraction camouflage treatment in Class III malocclusions: a retrospective cohort study with gender-based evaluation.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Mandibular Molar Distalization Using Interradicular Microimplants and Direct Anchorage: A Case Report.Cureus · 2026Article
- The Therapeutic Approaches Dealing with Malocclusion Type III-Narrative Review.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Mandibular arch distalization using temporary anchorage devices (TADs) is effective in correcting borderline Class lll cases without surgery. This review analysed the existing literature evaluating the dental, skeletal, and soft tissue changes after en masse mandibular arch distalization using TADs. We followed PRISMA guidelines and registered this review in PROSPERO database CRD42023450524. PubMed, Google Scholar, Cochrane, Web of Science, and SCOPUS databases were searched. Orthodontic patients requiring en masse mandibular distalization using TADs were compared with different modalities of distalization. Dental changes were evaluated along with skeletal and soft tissue changes and treatment duration. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), cohort studies, longitudinal studies, and retrospective studies were eligible to be included. The risk of bias was assessed using ROBINS-I tool ("Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies-of Interventions"). Of 1764 identified records, seven studies (one non-RCT, one prospective clinical trial, and five retrospective cohort studies) were included. One study had a low risk of bias, three had moderate bias, two had serious bias, and one had critical bias. All studies showed molar distalization and distal tipping with significant retraction of the lower lip. Miniplates showed greater distalization compared to miniscrews. Interradicular miniscrews exhibited the least distal tipping. Changes in SNB, ANB, occlusal plane angle, and mandibular plane angle were reported. Retromolar screws and ramal plates reported reduced treatment duration. TADs are effective in en masse distalization of mandibular dentition with intrusive or extrusive effects.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.