SynthesisEuropean archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry2025
Clinical outcomes of interproximal enamel reduction in orthodontic treatment of children and adolescents: a systematic review.
Synthesis in European archives of paediatric dentistry : official journal of the European Academy of Paediatric Dentistry, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate the clinical outcomes of interproximal enamel reduction (IPR) in the permanent dentition amongst children and adolescents undergoing orthodontic treatment, focusing on enamel integrity, periodontal health and dimensional changes.
methodsA systematic review was conducted using Embase, Medline, Web of Science, and manual research to identify publications between 1970 and October 2024 reporting on IPR outcomes in patients aged 8-17 years. Ten studies met the inclusion criteria: two cohort studies, one case-control study, and seven case reports. Most assessed immediately post-treatment, and few reported follow-up ranging from 3 to 15 years (mean: 5.71 years; median: 3.67 years). Clinical parameters such as enamel integrity, caries incidence, and periodontal status were used as proxies for safety. Data on IPR indications, treatment techniques, and clinical outcomes were analysed. Risk of bias was assessed using Newcastle-Ottawa and Murad tool. PROSPERO ID: CRD420251007607.
resultsThe 10 articles analysed included 61 participants (mean age: 13.4 ± 1.71 years). Primary IPR indications were dental crowding (57.4%), followed by tooth reshaping (42.6%) and tooth-size-arch-size discrepancies (3.3%). Fixed appliances were used in 72.1% of cases. Mandibular anterior teeth were the most frequently treated (67.2%), followed by maxillary anterior (49.2%), mandibular posterior (37.5%), and maxillary posterior teeth (29.5%), with an average of 0.3 mm reduction per surface. No significant differences were observed between IPR and non-IPR groups regarding enamel and periodontium. Post-orthodontic arch dimensions remained stable, with minimal mandibular anterior relapse.
conclusionIPR appears to be a feasible adjunct for managing mild to moderate crowding in young patients. Further long-term studies are recommended.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40650721What 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.