Joss Vassalli2010
Joss Vassalli2010
Joss Vassalli2010
I Joss-Vassalli
C Grebenstein
N Topouzelis
A Sculean
C Katsaros
Author's affiliations:
I. Joss-Vassalli, Department of Orthodontics
and Dentofacial Orthopedics, Medical
School, University of Bern, Bern, Switzerland
C. Grebenstein, Department of Orthodontics
and Oral Biology, Radboud University
Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The
Netherlands
N. Topouzelis, Department of Orthodontics,
School of Dentistry, Aristotle University of
Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece
A. Sculean, Department of Periodontology,
Medical School, University of Bern, Bern,
Switzerland
C. Katsaros, Department of Orthodontics
and Oral Biology, Radboud University
Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The
Netherlands, and Department of
Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics,
Medical School, University of Bern, Bern,
Switzerland
Correspondence to:
Dr Isabella Joss-Vassalli
Department of Orthodontics and
Dentofacial Orthopedics
Medical School
University of Bern
Freiburgstr. 7
CH-3010 Bern
Switzerland
E-mail: [email protected]
Abstract
Authors Joss-Vassalli I, Grebenstein C, Topouzelis N, Sculean A, Katsaros C
To perform a systematic review on the effect of changes in incisor inclination
owing to orthodontic treatment and the occurrence of gingival recession. PubMed,
EMBASE Excerpta Medica and CENTRAL of the Cochrane Library were searched
and a hand search was performed. From 1925 articles identified, 17 articles were
finally included: six experimental animal studies and 11 retrospective clinical
studies in humans. More proclined teeth compared with less proclined teeth or
untreated teeth had in most studies a higher occurrence or severity of gingival
recession. Contradictory results were found regarding a possible statistically significant correlation between the extent of gingival recession and the amount of
incisor proclination during treatment, width of attached gingiva, hygiene, periodontal condition or thickness of the symphysis. There are no high quality animal
or clinical studies on this topic. Movement of the incisors out of the osseous
envelope of the alveolar process may be associated with a higher tendency for
developing gingival recessions. The amount of recession found in studies with
statistically significant differences between proclined and non-proclined incisors is
small and the clinical consequence questionable. Because of the low level of
evidence of the included studies, the results should be considered with caution.
Further randomized clinical studies including clinical examination of hygiene and
gingival condition before, during and after treatment are needed to clarify the
effect of orthodontic changes in incisor inclination and the occurrence of
gingival recession.
Key words: gingival disease; gingival recession; incisor inclination; orthodontics;
periodontium; tooth movement
Introduction
Dates:
Accepted 1 May 2010
To cite this article:
Joss-Vassalli I, Grebenstein C, Topouzelis N,
Sculean A, Katsaros C:
Orthodontic therapy and gingival recession: a
systematic review
Orthod Craniofac Res 2010;13:127141
2010 John Wiley & Sons A/S
128
Data were recorded on specially designed data extraction forms. First abstracts were reviewed without considering the number of patients reported. Articles that
apparently fulfilled the inclusion criteria and articles of
which the title or abstract did not present enough relevant information were obtained in full text. Secondly,
the following data were extracted (if reported) from
full-text articles: year of publication; study design;
method to measure gingiva recession; error analysis;
time since end of orthodontic treatment at outcome
assessment; number, gender and mean age of patients;
ethnical background of patients; orthodontic intervention; treatment duration; existence of a control group
and their description; outcomes regarding gingiva
recessions; correlations between extent or presence of
gingiva recession and different variables such as age,
gender, hygiene, degree of labial or palatinal movement
of the incisors.
Results
Results of search
Quality assessment
Animal studies
The quality of methodology, statistics, and performance of each study were assessed, and the studies
were graded with a score of AC (Grade A: high value
of evidence, Grade C: low value of evidence) according to predeterminded criteria using the system of
Bondemark (13). They described the criteria for grading
the studies as follows:
Grade A: high value of evidence (all criteria should be
met):
Randomized clinical study or a prospective study
with a well-defined control group.
Defined diagnosis and endpoints.
Diagnostic reliability tests and reproducibility tests
described.
Blinded outcome assessment.
Grade B: moderate value of evidence (all criteria
should be met):
Cohort study or retrospective cases series with
defined control or reference group.
Quality assessment
129
240 days
5464 days proclination
Max. 35 cN
32, 31 or 41, 42
old humans
Not reported.
1974
respectively
Monkey
Monkey
112 days
50 cN
11, 21, 31, 41
Adult
5
Female
Monkey
1981
Steiner et al. (15)
2 months retraction
3 weeks
46 months
1982
Engelking and Zachrisson (17)
8 months break
450 days
Premolars: 30 cN
50 cN
12, 11, 21, 22
12 months
6
Dog
1983
Thilander et al. (18)
Monkey
150 days
1 month
34 months
Incisors: 50 cN
11, 21, 14, 24
Adult
5
1987
Wennstrom et al. (12)
Monkey
assessment
Age
N
Gender
Species
Year
Author
Teeth moved
Treatment duration
at outcome
active treatment
131
132
+ 3.35 mm
+6 mm
Range: 1.81.9 mm
than upper)
no movement,
+ 1.9 mm*
No recession
recessions)
No recession
Range: 01.5 mm
, average.
Not reported.
*Statistically significant more gingival recession in displaced incisors than in control teeth (Steiner et al., 15, Batenhorst et al., 14).
+3.05 0.8 mm
Range: 2.15 mm
)1.83 0.88 mm
+ 3.3 mm
): decrease of recession
of incisors
Author
+ 0.40 mm
is statistically related to
+: increase of recession
Gingiva recession
Degree of proclination
displaced and control teeth (12, 15), whereas Batenhorst et al. (14) found that the width of the attached
gingiva increased on the facial surfaces of all experimental teeth, but it remained about the same on the
controls.
Human studies
Quality assessment
133
134
2006
2005
2003
2002
2001
1998
1991
Year
Author
C: 150
Female N = 114
White N = 56
N=4
Americans
Asian
C: 30
Female N = 30
98
Second part:
T: 16
Male N = 67
Female N = 31
Second part:
31, 41
Teeth analysed
C: 33
postoperative)
(3 years
12 years
10 years
31, 41
C:
1833 years
Age
T: 29
C: 10
Female N = 12
T: 10
Male N = 8
C: 17
First part:
First part:
Female N = 21
C: Male N = 9
T: 45
T: Male N = 15
C: 27
Female N = 39
Americans
N=7
T: 40
T+C: Male N = 28
C:
T: 150
T: Male N = 36
150
34
African
White
Female N = 114
Male N = 36
White
Gender
Race
C: 0 g
T: 1525 g
1525 g
tooth
Force per
24 months
appliance)
(+ fixed
Herbst
7 months
4 years
T: 7.8 years
recession)
C: 9.38 years
T: 7.83 years
treatment
1 month
1 month
747 months
assessment
treatment at outcome
duration
Treatment
31, 41
Not reported.
C: 27
12 years
T: 45
1968
Pearson (20)
C: 17.1 years
C: 32
T: 26.7 years
C: 8
1977
Sperry et al. (21)
T: 36
C: 2.1 years
T: 9.2 years
1978
Dorfman (19)
T: 16
assessment
duration
Gender
Race
Year
Author
Table 3. Continued
Age
Teeth analysed
tooth
treatment at outcome
Force per
Treatment
135
136
Tooth 42:
C: 0 mm
Sex
Race
Treatment duration
Extraction
Treatment type
T: +0.04 0.17 mm
C: +0.02 0.11 mm
Tooth 41:
T: +0.10 0.32 mm
C: +0.07 0.28 mm
Angle classification
Age
Tooth 31:
Amount of proclination
C: )4.37 6.21
with no treatment)
Sex
Plaque
Age
T: +5.03 6.37
C: 0.2 0.71 mm
T: 0.4 0.86 mm
Tooth 32*:
C: 0.3 0.83 mm
T: 0.3 0.81 mm
Tooth 31:
C: 0.3 0.8 mm
T: 0.4 0.86 mm
Tooth 41*:
C: 0.2 0.62 mm
T: 0.3 0.83 mm
Total amount:
T: +3.4 2.6 mm
+ 3.4 mm
Range: 0.512 mm
median: 0 mm)
Plaque index
Median: 0 mm (pretreatment,
+5.85 3.92
statistically related to
): decrease
+: increase
change in gingiva
Author
T: 0.27 0.52 mm
C: +1.67 3.42
First part:
Tooth 32: )0.1 0.6 mm
Tooth 31 + 41: +0.1 0.5 mm
Tooth 42: )0.1 0.5 mm
Range: 0.519.5
Second part:
T: +16.4 1.9
C: +2.7 1.7
T: )1.03 mm
proclination C-group)
Width of symphysis in T-group
T: +0.76 0.62 mm
C: +0.31 0.35 mm
C: <2
(after 3 years)
T: >10
C: )0.96 mm
reported)
C: )0.1 0.6 mm
T: +0.1 0.5 mm
Tooth 42:
C: +0.2 0.4 mm
T: +0.3 0.6 mm
Tooth 41:
C: +0.1 0.5 mm
T: +0.1 0.6 mm
Tooth 31:
C: )0.1 0.6 mm
T: +0.2 1 mm
Tooth 32:
Second part:
C: 0.17 0.32 mm
Total amount:
T: +9.98 5.56
statistically related to
): decrease
change in gingiva
Author
Table 4. Continued
Amount of proclination
Gender
Amount of proclination
137
138
C:
retraction
lower incisors)
of apex
T:
Not reported.
Significantly less gingival recession in both groups after retroclination, but no difference between T-group and C-group Ngan et al. (29).
T-group had significantly more teeth with recessions than C-group (Sperry et al. (21).
Pearson (20)
C: )1
T: + 1.4
Dorfman (19)
): decrease
+: increase
change in gingiva
Author
Table 4. Continued
The presence of baseline recession correlated significantly with development or increase in gingival
recession (27).
Yared et al. (28) noted that recession was more frequent when the height of keratinized tissue was
<2 mm, and 93% of the incisors that developed recession had thicknesses of the free gingival margin
<0.5 mm at the follow-up examination. Thickness had
greater relevance to recession than final inclination of
the incisors.
Melsen and Allais (27) found a significant correlation
between the pre-treatment width of keratinized gingiva
and gingival biotype and the development or increase
in the ginigval recession.
Discussion
A notable finding was that none of the selected
studies were graded A (high value of evidence). All
the animal studies and four human studies were
graded as a low value of evidence (Grade C), seven
human studies had a moderate value of evidence
(Grade B). Summary of the scientific value of the
included studies is limited.
The major weak point of the included human
studies compared with the animal studies is related
to the retrospective study design used. The examinations of clinical data like gingival height, gingival
biotype, gingival recession or width of attached
gingiva could only be carried out on intraoral slides
or plaster casts. McComb (30) questioned the results
of studies that measured clinical crown height on
study casts to evaluate periodontal recession because
of the reduced tooth height of the cast caused by
attrition or fractures. Just four human trials included
also clinical measurements of the gingival parameters
but only at the follow-up examination (21, 23, 26, 28).
It is quite difficult to draw conclusions based on
these findings. A prospective study design with clinical examinations before, during and after treatment
would give more precise information about the
interaction of orthodontic tooth proclination and the
development of gingival recession.
A further weakness of most included studies is the
short time period between the end of active treatment
and the evaluation of the outcomes. If the records are
taken immediately after debanding, the periodontal
139
Conclusion
There are no high-quality animal or clinical studies on
this topic. The major reason for the low level of evidence in the animal as well as in the human studies is
the lack of diagnostic reliability tests. Animal studies
tend to suggest more gingival recession in displaced
incisors than in control teeth. Clinical studies showed
that more proclined teeth compared with less proclined
teeth or untreated teeth and movement of the incisors
out of the osseous envelope of the alveolar process may
be associated with a higher tendency for developing
gingival recessions. Because of the low level of evidence
of the included studies, the results should be considered with caution. In addition, the amount of recession
found in studies with statistically significant differences
between proclined and not proclined incisors is small
and the clinical consequence questionable.
Further prospective, randomized clinical studies
including clinical examination of hygiene and gingival
condition before, during and after treatment are
needed to clarify the effect of orthodontic changes in
incisor inclination and the occurrence of gingival
recession.
References
1. Lindhe J, Karring T, Araujo M. Anatomy of the Periodontium. In:
Lindhe J, Karring T, Lang NP, editors. Clinical Periodontology and
Implant Dentistry. Copenhagen: Blackwell Munksgaard; 2003. pp.
349.
2. Armitage GC. Development of a classification system for
periodontal diseases and conditions. Ann Periodontol 1999;4:1
6.
3. Kassab M, Cohen R. The etiology and prevalence of gingival
recession. J Am Dent Assoc 2003;134:2205.
4. Loe H, Anerud A, Boysen H. The natural history of periodontal
disease in man: prevalence, severity, and extent of gingival
recession. J Periodontol 1992;63:48995.
5. Khocht A, Simon G, Person P, Denepitiya JL. Gingival recession in
relation to history of hard toothbrush use. J Periodontol
1993;64:9005.
140
29. Ngan PW, Burch JG, Wei SH. Grafted and ungrafted labial gingival
recession in pediatric orthodontic patients: effects of retraction
and inflammation. Quintessence Int 1991;22:10311.
30. McComb JL. Orthodontic treatment and isolated gingival recession: a review. Br J Orthod 1994;21:1519.
31. Tersin J. Studies of gingival conditions in relation to orthodontic
treatment: IV The effect of oral hygiene measures on gingival
exudation during the course of orthodontic treatment. Swed Dent
J 1978;2:1316.
141