Cephalometric analysis is an essential tool used in orthodontic diagnosis and treatment planning. The main objectives of correct cephalometric analysis include resolving anteroposterior and vertical maxillary and mandibular base discrepancies. For a diagnostic tool to be of value, it should be precise, reliable and reproducible. Unfortunately, according to some studies, the accuracy of input and, therefore, the diagnostic reliability of some of the points and measurements may not be satisfactory. To this end, new cephalometric measurements are being developed with increased precision. In order to properly and definitively determine the usefulness of a given measurement in cephalometric diagnosis, it is necessary to carry out a critical evaluation of available studies. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate the available scientific literature describing new landmarks and reference linear and angular measurements of 2D cephalometric analyses assessing the sagittal and vertical discrepancy in the position of jaw bases since the last systematic review in 2013. The secondary aim was to assess the accuracy and reliability of new anthropometric landmarks and reference planes in relation to those used previously, and their instability in relation to growth and orthodontic tooth movements. To carry out the intended plan, electronic databases such as PubMed, Scholar Google, Web of Science and Pro Quest were searched using specific keywords. Initially, a total of 1451 articles were retrieved. Then, duplicate articles in all databases were excluded from the resulting publications. The results showed that despite such a high number of articles published in peer-reviewed scientific journals, only 12 studies on new cephalometric analyses in the sagittal plane and 4 studies on new cephalometric analyses in the horizontal plane met the criteria and, as a result, were included in the review.

Background: Incisor retraction is often a crucial phase in ongoing orthodontic treatment, with significant implications for alveolar remodeling mechanisms. There are two prevailing theories which seek to explain this. According to the first, teeth move with the bone, while according to the second, teeth move within the bone. This systematic review seeks to assess morphometric changes in the maxillary alveolar process resulting from incisor retraction following premolar extraction and to evaluate the potential for bone remodeling associated with orthodontic movement. Methods: The study was conducted following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. The following electronic databases were searched: PubMed, Google Scholar, Web of Science EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. The databases were searched using the following keywords: “Bone remodeling and retraction of incisors”, “Alveolar bone and incisor retraction”, “Bone thickness and incisor retraction”, and “Bone changes and orthodontic treatment”. Search filters were utilized to identify relevant papers and articles written in English and published during the last 10 years. Based on the information provided in their abstracts, papers and articles were selected according to the following criteria: randomized clinical trials (RCTs), controlled clinical prospective trials (CCTs), and retrospective studies. Articles unrelated to the study’s scope or failing to meet inclusion criteria were excluded. These generally comprised individual case reports, case series reports, literature reviews, experimental studies, studies with limited data (including conference abstracts and journal writings), studies involving an unrepresentative group of patients (less than 10 patients), studies concerning patients with syndromes, and animal experiments. The remaining articles which were deemed relevant underwent comprehensive reference review and such journals as the American Journal of Orthodontics, Dentofacial Orthopedics, International Orthodontics, Journal of Clinical Orthodontics, and Angle Orthodontist were manually searched. Results: Seven articles meeting the inclusion criteria articles were selected for final evaluation, with a total of 284 participants, including 233 women and 51 men. During the analysis of the results included in the publications, a lack of homogeneity was observed, rendering a reliable statistical analysis and heterogeneity assessment unobtainable. Noteworthy disparities in methodologies and measurements posed a risk of drawing inappropriate conclusions. Consequently, emphasis was placed on qualitative analysis, emphasizing the need for standardization in future studies of a similar nature, to enable valid and comparable analyses. Conclusions: The research findings incorporated in this review demonstrate that significant bone loss occurs because of incisor retraction, which diminishes distance between the bone surface and the root surface on the palatal aspect. The magnitude of this change may vary, contingent upon both the extent of incisor displacement and alterations in their inclination, thereby affecting the positioning of the root tips. This change is significantly higher in adults than in growing adolescents. The rationale behind this assertion lies in the widely recognized phenomenon of declining cellular activity with advancing age. The decrease in the speed and intensity of cellular changes may explain the diminished capacity for remodeling as patient age increases. There is ongoing discourse regarding alterations in the volume of bone on the labial aspect of the alveolar process. Further research is necessary to measure whether bone remodeling during orthodontic movement is contingent upon other factors, such as the speed and biomechanics of retraction, the level of applied orthodontic force, and the patient age.

Background: Orthodontic treatment involves moving teeth within the alveolar ridge. Bone remodeling is associated with the activity of osteoblasts and osteoclasts. Procedures such as corticotomy-assisted orthodontic therapy (CAOT) or periodontally accelerated osteogenic orthodontics (PAOO) are intended to reduce bone density and negative stress on the grip side and therefore limit bone resorption during orthodontic movement or add bone substitute material so that the tooth does not cross the vestibular plate. Methods: The study was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. The study design was defined in the PICO format—Population (P): patients with full permanent dentition, both adolescents and adults; Intervention (I): orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances using additional supportive treatments such as CAOT or PAOO; Comparison (C): assessment of the impact of additional treatments during orthodontic treatment on the remodeling of the alveolar bone and the condition of the periodontium; Result (O): statistically significant/non-significant differences in the condition of the alveolar bone before and after orthodontic treatment. Search filters include the time of publication of the article, systematic reviews from the last five years, and publications that appeared in English. The information provided in the abstracts of systematic reviews that describe the effects of additional procedures during orthodontic treatment such as CAOT or PAOO on the health of periodontium was analyzed. Articles unrelated to the subject of the planned study and those in which tooth movement acceleration was analyzed were excluded. Results: Eight articles were selected in which a total number of 835 subjects took part. The changes in bone density and effects on periodontium were different after CAOT and PAOO. Conclusions: The validity of CAOT and PAOO procedures remains controversial. Better results are obtained when combined with tissue augmentation or thickening of the gingival phenotype rather than as stand-alone procedures, as their uses to protect periodontal tissues are limited.

Background: There are various methods of controlling the inclination of the incisors during retraction, but there is no evidence as to the advantages of some methods over others. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine the effectiveness of the methods used to control torque during anterior teeth retraction. Methods: In accordance with the PRISMA guidelines, the main research question was defined in the PICO format [P: patients with complete permanent dentition; I: the maxillary incisor torque after (I) and before I retraction with straight-wire appliance and different modes of torque control; O: statistically significant differences in torque values of the upper incisors after orthodontic treatment]. The MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases were searched for keywords combining: retraction orthodontics, torque control orthodontics, torque orthodontics, inclination orthodontics, torque control retraction. The articles were subjected to risk of bias and quality analyses with the ROBINS-I protocol and the modified Newcastle–Ottawa QAS, respectively. Meta-analyses were performed with both fixed- and random-effects models. Results: 13 articles were selected in which total number of 580 subjects took part. In all studies, incisors were retroclined during retraction by 2.46° (mean difference), which was statistically significant. Considering the articles separately, the differences in torque between the study group and the control group were statistically significant in six articles. The Q statistic was 36.25 with p = 0.0003 and I² = 66.9%, which indicated a high level of study heterogeneity. Conclusion: Both properly performed corticotomy and en-masse retraction using orthodontic microimplants seem to be the most effective and scientifically validated methods of torque control. Further high-quality research is needed to perform better quality analyses and draw more reliable conclusions.

Background: Hydrostatic pressure in the periodontal ligament (PDL) plays a critical role in orthodontic treatment, influencing tooth movement and remodeling of periodontal tissue. The relationship between alveolar cortical bone density and the risk of root resorption due to excessive stress in the PDL has not been clearly defined. Objective: This study aimed to analyze hydrostatic pressure in the periodontal ligament of the tooth roots during en-masse retraction of the maxillary incisors using temporary skeletal anchorage devices (TISADs) after the first premolar extractions, as well as during full arch retraction. Methods: A numerical model was used, varying the Young’s modulus of cortical bone from 12.5 GPa to 27.5 GPa in increments of 3.0 GPa. Extreme values for bone stiffness were derived from the literature. In all the cases analyzed, the hook height was fixed at 6 mm, and the cranial surface was constrained. Results: Doubling the stiffness of the cortical bone approximately reduced the hydrostatic pressure in the PDL by 1.5 times for both full-arch retraction and post-first premolar extraction retraction. A critical hydrostatic pressure of 4.7 kPa was exceeded in full-arch retraction for low Young’s modulus of 12.5 Gpa values at forces as low as 600 g. On the contrary, for cortical bone with a high Young’s modulus of 27.5 GPa, this critical pressure was reached only at forces around 960 g, approximately 1.6 times higher. Conclusions: The density of the alveolar cortical bone significantly influences the hydrostatic pressure in the PDL of most tooth roots during orthodontic treatment. This parameter can be a critical factor in the risk of root resorption when optimal forces are exceeded. Further research is necessary to better understand these dynamics. Individual protocols for orthodontic treatment and CBCT imaging are necessary to minimize complications in the form of root resorption.

Background: Cephalometric analysis is an essential tool used in orthodontic diagnosis and treatment planning. The aim of this study was to evaluate the reliability and repeatability of new cephalometric points introduced in Tau angle analysis, in contrast to the gold standard, which is the analysis of the ANB angle. For this purpose, an attempt was made to assess the repeatability and reliability of the introduction of anthropometric points by evaluating both inter- and intraobserver parameters, as well as the agreement among the orthodontists participating in the study. Methods: Repeatability and reliability assessments for all six anthropometric points (N, A, B, T, M, G) used in the analysis of the ANB and Tau angles were conducted individually by 29 orthodontists. This assessment was performed in triplicate on the day of the study, on the day following the first study, and on the seventh day after the second study. Measurement errors for the ANB and Tau angles were evaluated using the Dahlberg formula and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). Results: The orthodontists in the study measured sagittal discrepancy significantly more accurately using the ANB angle compared to the Tau angle (p < 0.001). The Dahlberg error for measuring the Tau angle was three times greater than that for the ANB angle (p < 0.001). Additionally, the ICC for the Tau angle was more than 3.5 times smaller than that for the ANB angle, while the R&R error for Tau measurement was more than three times greater than that for the ANB angle (p < 0.001). Conclusions: The results of ANB angle measurements exhibit fewer errors in comparison to Tau angle measurements.