Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42222474›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in dental medicine2026

Micro-osteoperforation for accelerating orthodontic tooth movement: a meta-analysis of short-term efficacy, safety, and optimal application parameters.

Shu-Hong Ching, Xiaozhe Wang, Danyang Li, Qianhan Zheng, Jiahao Chen, Yi Zheng, Xuepeng Chen, Qian Liu

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in dental medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

8 authors.

Shu-Hong ChingStomatology Hospital, School of Stomatology, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases of Zhejiang Province, Key Laboratory of Oral Biomedical Research of Zhejiang Province, Cancer Center of Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China.
Xiaozhe WangStomatology Hospital, School of Stomatology, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases of Zhejiang Province, Key Laboratory of Oral Biomedical Research of Zhejiang Province, Cancer Center of Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China.
Danyang LiStomatology Hospital, School of Stomatology, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases of Zhejiang Province, Key Laboratory of Oral Biomedical Research of Zhejiang Province, Cancer Center of Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China.
Qianhan ZhengStomatology Hospital, School of Stomatology, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases of Zhejiang Province, Key Laboratory of Oral Biomedical Research of Zhejiang Province, Cancer Center of Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China.
Jiahao ChenStomatology Hospital, School of Stomatology, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases of Zhejiang Province, Key Laboratory of Oral Biomedical Research of Zhejiang Province, Cancer Center of Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China.
Yi ZhengStomatology Hospital, School of Stomatology, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases of Zhejiang Province, Key Laboratory of Oral Biomedical Research of Zhejiang Province, Cancer Center of Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China.
Xuepeng ChenStomatology Hospital, School of Stomatology, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases of Zhejiang Province, Key Laboratory of Oral Biomedical Research of Zhejiang Province, Cancer Center of Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China.
Qian LiuStomatology Hospital, School of Stomatology, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Clinical Research Center for Oral Diseases of Zhejiang Province, Key Laboratory of Oral Biomedical Research of Zhejiang Province, Cancer Center of Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Prolonged orthodontic treatment is associated with adverse clinical outcomes such as enamel white spot lesions and root resorption, and micro-osteoperforation (MOPs) is a minimally invasive intervention for accelerating orthodontic tooth movement (OTM). Objectives: This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy of MOPs in accelerating OTM, assess its potential adverse effects on periodontal tissues, root structure and anchorage, and summarize the optimal application parameters of MOPs for clinical practice. Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, Scopus, Cochrane Library, LILACS, and Google Scholar, with 16 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) included after screening 1,175 records. This study was registered in the PROSPERO International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (registration number: CRD420251149503). The Cochrane ROB 2 tool was used to assess the risk of bias of included studies, and the GRADE approach was applied to evaluate the certainty of the cumulative evidence. Results: Compared with traditional orthodontic treatment, the MOPs group achieved an increase of 0.67 mm (95% CI: 0.45-0.88) in the total OTM distance and a monthly increase of 0.20 mm (95% CI: 0.13-0.26) in the OTM rate. Multiple MOPs significantly increased the total OTM distance (1.17 mm, 95% CI: 0.21-2.13) compared with single MOPs (0.61 mm, 95% CI: 0.45-0.77), while the monthly OTM rate remained stable at approximately 0.2 mm. For secondary outcomes, MOPs was associated with a non-clinically significant increase in root resorption (mean difference: 0.19 mm, 95% CI: -0.14 to 0.51), no significant anchorage loss, and mild, transient adverse effects on periodontal parameters (e.g., slight increase in probing depth). Postoperative pain in the MOPs group was significantly higher on the surgery day but diminished rapidly, with no long-term impact on patients' quality of life. Subgroup analyses showed that mandibular MOPs, repeated MOPs application, and the use of the Propel device were associated with enhanced acceleration effects. Risk of bias: The included studies had an overall low risk of bias in randomization, incomplete outcome data and selective reporting domains. Moderate risks of performance and detection bias were present across all studies due to the inherent inability to blind participants and operators for surgical interventions such as MOPs. Conclusions: MOPs appears to be an effective adjunctive approach for accelerating orthodontic tooth movement without causing clinically significant damage to root structure, anchorage, or periodontal tissues. Meanwhile, long-term outcomes and optimal application parameters-such as the number, depth, and frequency of perforations-require further investigation. Clinical implementation should be individualized based on patient characteristics and treatment objectives. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/recorddashboard, PROSPERO CRD420251149503.

Indexed as

acceleratory orthodontic interventionsanchorage changesmicro-osteoperforationorthodonticspain and life qualityperiodontal parametersroot resorptiontooth movement techniques

Identifiers

PMID42222474
PMCPMC13216033

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.