No abstract

No abstract

This review article aimed to evaluate the evidence on the use of a presurgical orthopedic appliance (POP) in patients with cleft lip and palate. The search was conducted using Medline/PubMed, Scholar Google, Clinical Trails, ProQuest, Scopus, and Web of Science databases. During the search, 7,926 records were found, of which 105 full-text articles were analyzed, and 23 studies included analysis in patients with the use of POP, and their control groups without the use of POP prior to the same type of surgery. The devices most used for POP in the management of LPH were: the passive palate (Hotz palate), the nasolaveolar moulding (NAM), the McNeil device, and finally, the T-traction. The primary outcomes evaluated were: facial aesthetics and nasal appearance; the evaluation of cephalometric measurements, upper airways, nasal fissure width, as well as anatomical references such as inter-canine and inter-tuberosity distances. In addition, studies that evaluated occlusion and phonation were found. The evidence from this literature suggests that the use of active appliances had a better effect than passive appliances in terms of facial aesthetics and approximation of the maxillary seg-ments for the closure of the fissure. However, the heterogeneity, the risk of bias, and the low quality of the studies do not allow to state firm conclusions.

Recently, biomimetic bioactive biomaterials have been introduced to the market for dental pulp capping. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to determine any variation between the effect of using TheraCal LC and other bioactive biomaterials for pulp capping is different, as measured by dentin increment and clinical success. The risk of bias was assessed using the Risk of Bias 2 and Newcastle–Ottawa tools for randomized clinical trials and observational studies. A search for relevant articles was performed on five databases. Additionally, the quality of the included studies was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria. A summary of individual studies and a meta-analysis were performed. The odds ratio of data from clinical success was combined using a random-effects meta-analysis. The meta-analysis results showed homogeneity between the studies (I2 = 0%). They revealed that the clinical success showed no differences between the patients who received TheraCal LC, light-cured calcium silicate-based biomimetic biomaterial, for dental pulp capping or the comparator biomaterials (p > 0.5). However, the certainty of the evidence was low to moderate due to the risk of bias in the included studies.