This systematic review (SR) and meta-analysis (MA) aimed to compare the treatment effects of orthognathic surgery and orthodontic camouflage treatment in adult subjects with Class III malocclusion (C-III-M). Two independent reviewers conducted the literature search comprehensively from 1990 to 8 November 2021. PubMed, Science Direct, Scopus, EBSCOhost and Google Scholar databases were included for literature search. Moreover, a manual search of references from relevant studies was performed. Based on the literature search, a total of six articles were selected for SR and three articles fulfilled the criteria of a MA. Standardized mean difference (SMD) was used to evaluate and compare the treatment effects of orthodontic camouflage treatment and orthognathic surgery in adult C-III-M patients. Test for overall effect from the studies was used to estimate the treatment effect of C-III-M. However, Significant heterogeneity and publication bias was apparent among the selected studies. More research on the treatment effects of orthodontic camouflage treatment and orthognathic surgery in C-III-M is necessary to conclude possible interactions with better specificity.

This study aimed to assess the outcomes of low-level laser therapy (LLLT) with the conventional bracket (CB) and self-ligating (SL) bracket systems on root resorption (RR) during orthodontic treatment. A total of 32 patients were included in this randomized clinical trial. All the patients were randomly divided into four individual groups (SLL: self-ligating laser, CBL: conventional bracket laser, SLNL: self-ligating non-laser, CBNL: conventional bracket non-laser). RR was measured from the cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) radiographs which were taken at two stages of the orthodontic treatment: pre-treatment (T1) and after leveling and alignment stage (T2). Wilcoxon rank test for the comparison was conducted to compare the RR at T1 and T2 stages within each group and showed a significant difference (p < 0.05) for various variables. Mann Whitney test compared the RR in laser and non-laser groups irrespective of the bracket systems and exhibited no significant differences except the left lateral incisor. Moreover, CB and SL groups showed no significant difference in RR among any tooth. Kruskal Wallis test was performed to compare the RR among all groups which presented no significant differences. LLLT and bracket systems have no consequences on RR until the leveling and alignment stage of orthodontic treatment.