Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this systematic review was to research the difference between root-filled teeth (RFT) and vital pulp teeth (VPT) in orthodontically induced external apical root resorption (EARR) and to offer suggestions for clinicians on therapeutic sequence and timing when considering combined treatment of endodontic and orthodontic. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An electronic search of published studies was conducted before November 2022 in PubMed, Web of Science and other databases. Eligibility criteria were based on the Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome, and Study design (PICOS) framework. RevMan 5.3 software was used for statistical analysis. Single-factor meta-regression analysis was used to explore the sources of literature heterogeneity, and a random effects model was used for analysis. RESULTS: This meta-analysis comprised 8 studies with 10 sets of data. As there was significant heterogeneity among the studies, we employed a random effects model. The funnel plot of the random effects model exhibited a symmetrical distribution, indicating no publication bias among the included studies. The EARR rate of RFT was significantly lower than that of VPT. CONCLUSIONS: In the context of concurrent endodontic and orthodontic treatment, priority should be given to endodontic therapy, as it serves as the foundation for subsequent orthodontic procedures. The optimal timing for orthodontic tooth movement post-root canal therapy is contingent upon factors such as the extent of periapical lesion resolution and the degree of dental trauma sustained. A comprehensive clinical assessment is essential in guiding the selection of the most suitable approach for achieving optimal treatment outcomes.