Title Insufficient Evidence to Prove the Efficacy of Piezocision-Assisted Orthodontic Treatment
Clinical Question In a healthy adult with malocclusion, is piezocision-assisted orthodontics more effective at increasing the rate of tooth movement, compared to orthodontics alone?
Clinical Bottom Line The current level of evidence does not support the use of piezocision-assisted orthodontics over conventional orthodontic treatment, to increase the rate of tooth movement in healthy adult patients.
Best Evidence  
PubMed ID Author / Year Patient Group Study type
(level of evidence)
20814602Dibart/20102 subjects - Female (31 y.o) Male (24)Case Report
Key resultsAfter 8 months of treatment the two mm of Class II relationship, crowding, overjet, and deep bite were improved in both patients.
19715011Dibart/20091 subject - Female (26 y.o)Case Report
Key resultsAfter 17 weeks of treatment, crowding was resolved, overjet was reduced to 1 mm and deep bite was improved to 8% mandibular incisor coverage from a pre-treatment 65% of mandibular incisor coverage.
24286911Keser/20131 subject - Female (25)Case Report
Key resultsAfter 8 months of treatment, crowding was resolved, crossbite was corrected, and ideal overbite and overjet were achieved.
Evidence Search "piezocision"
Comments on
The Evidence
All studies included were case reports on one or two patients. The validity of these results is questionable owing to the very low sample size, absence of a control group, and the lack of randomization. No objective measures were used to evaluate the results and the conclusions are not supported by the results. Randomized-controlled clinical trials would be very beneficial in establishing the effectiveness of piezocision-assisted orthodontic treatment.
Applicability Owing to the very low level of evidence, these studies have very little applicability to the orthodontic treatment of adults.
Specialty (Orthodontics)
Keywords Piezocision, adult orthodontics, accelerated orthodontic tooth movement
ID# 2683
Date of submission 03/23/2014
E-mail clintonm@livemail.uthscsa.edu
Author Michelle Clinton
Co-author(s) e-mail
Faculty mentor Dubravko Pavlin, DMD, PhD
Faculty mentor e-mail Pavlin@uthscsa.edu
Basic Science Rationale
(Mechanisms that may account for and/or explain the clinical question, i.e. is the answer to the clinical question consistent with basic biological, physical and/or behavioral science principles, laws and research?)
None available
Comments and Evidence-Based Updates on the CAT
None available