Introducción y objetivo: La Tracción cervical se ha utilizado durante décadas como tratamiento para la maloclusión de clase II. Aunque los efectos se han informado previamente, son algo contradictorios. El objetivo fué determinar la evidencia científica disponible que respalde los parámetros de uso clínico para la terapia con tracción extraoral cervical en el tratamiento temprano de la maloclusión de clase II. Materiales y métodos: Se realizó una búsqueda sistemática utilizando las bases de datos Medline, Google Scholar, Cochrane y Lilacs. La búsqueda incluyó artículos en inglés, español, portugués y alemán utilizando términos MeSH previamente seleccionados y términos de texto libre. La búsqueda incluyó artículos relacionados con el tratamiento de tracción extraoral cervical, revisiones sistemáticas, metanálisis, ensayos clínicos y estudios de cohortes, casos y controles y estudios transversales. La calidad metodológica se evaluó utilizando varias escalas según el tipo de estudio. Resultados: La búsqueda generó 334 artículos, 259 fueron eliminados porque eran duplicados y 34 fueron eliminados porque no cumplían con los criterios de inclusión. Se evaluaron 41 artículos en texto completo, se excluyeron 21 porque no cumplían con los criterios de inclusión, dejando un total de 20 artículos. Conclusiones: Los artículos ofrecieron recomendaciones variadas, pero claras. De acuerdo con la literatura y el juicio clínico, se recomienda el momento del tratamiento durante el período de crecimiento puberal. La fuerza más eficiente es de 450 a 500 g por lado durante 12 a 14 horas por día. Se debe usar un arco externo largo doblado 15 grados hacia arriba en pacientes con patrones normales e hipodivergentes. El control del crecimiento maxilar depende de la edad, la fuerza, la duración del tratamiento, etc. Se pueden esperar cambios en la sobrecarga debido a cambios en la inclinación dental, el crecimiento o el uso de aparatos adicionales. Se puede lograr una distalización molar promedio de 1 mm a 2 mm.

Introduction: this systematic review evaluated radiographic methods that allow to detect external root resorption (err) in orthodontics, to determine adequate time intervals for control radiographs, and to identify radiographic characteristics of err. Materials and methods: we carried out systematic electronic and manual searches in databases, without year restrictions, limited to papers in Spanish or English. We included cohort studies and randomized clinical trials performed on human subjects that assessed orthodontic movement with fixed appliances that recorded root resorption before or during the course of treatment. Two authors evaluated the articles independently and extracted the ones to be selected in a standardized format. Results: the initial search yielded 285 references. 40 articles that could be related to the topic were then identified by title and abstract. After the evaluation using the inclusion criteria, 26 articles were analyzed. Due to the heterogeneity among the articles, it was not possible to estimate a global measurement for the research questions. Conclusion: the ideal method for the detection of external root resorption (err) caused by orthodontic treatment is the cone-beam tomography, however periapical radiographies may be a useful tool. When such radiographies are used as a diagnosis method, they must be taken with a 6-month periodicity and the decrease in root length must be evaluated.

 Frecuencia de los trastornos pulpares y periapicales antes del tratamiento de ortodoncia Introduction and objective: Orthodontic forces can aggravate a pre-existent pulpal condition. The aim of the present study was to determine the frequency of pulpal disorders in patients prior to orthodontic treatment. Materials and methods: Transversal study.  37 patients (19 female, 18 male) who met the following criteria were included: Patients with permanent dentition (including second molars) with full root formation, with a complete set of periapical radiographs, and no previous orthodontic treatment.  Patients using pacemakers or with history of previous orthodontic treatment were excluded.  Clinical testing of pulpal vitality and sensitivity, as well as periapical condition, was performed. Relative and absolute frequencies for pulpal and periapical diagnoses were described. Also, stratification by gender, age, arch, and area was implemented.   Results: 981 teeth were analyzed, 48.6% of the teeth showed pulpal or periapical disorders (477/981). Pulpless teeth were found mostly in female patients (72.2%), patients with 41 years of age on average (26%), and patients exhibiting three or more restorations (2.8%). 20.5% teeth were affected with periapical conditions (39/942). The first left maxillary molar showed the highest frequency of pulpal and periapical disorders. 73.5% exhibited poorly-performed obturation or condensation techniques from the 34 affected teeth (25/34). 74.3% of affected teeth were in the maxilla and 64.1% were in the posterior area of the mouth. Conclusion: A detail clinical and radiological examination of pulpal and periapical status should be performed before the onset of orthodontic treatment.

I belong to the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) International Infectious Disease and Global Health Training Program (IID & GHTP). These are the program’s objectives (taken from: http://www.iidandghtp.com/iidghtp_program_objectives.html): 1) to equip trainees with the research, scientific knowledge, and skills to become outstanding researchers in infectious diseases and global health; 2) to create a novel and stimulating multidisciplinary and truly international research training environment that fosters creativity, opportunity, and innovation, and one that demands excellence; 3) to harness the unique opportunity offered by the critical mass of infectious diseases and global health infrastructure, research opportunities and outstanding scientists in the training of the next generation of infectious disease researchers; 4) to make available collaborative international research sites for the trainees’ primary research projects, sites for research practica and major course offerings; 5) to offer a shared learning environment, where trainees and mentors from all four of CIHR’s research pillars (clinical, social, basic, and epidemiology) and the four international training sites (Canada, Colombia, India, and Kenya) work cooperatively to explore issues of international infectious diseases and global health.

Introduction: the objective of this research was to identify in the available literature the amount and frequency of radiographies, photographs, and casts made to follow-up patients undergoing orthodontic treatment. Materials and methods: a systematic review that consisted of an electronic database search was performed to find articles that included the description of the frequency and amount of panoramic and lateral cephalic radiographies, photographs, and casts in their methodology. We included cohort and case-control studies, as well as clinical trials, limiting our analysis to papers available in English or Spanish. We applied the Jadad score and the NewcastleOttawa scale to the selected papers to establish their methodological quality. In addition, we determined the age of the subjects in the experimental groups in order to identify the type of orthodontic treatment, whether it was interceptive or corrective. Results: the search yielded 342 articles in total, identified by the information contained in the title and abstract. 273 articles were excluded due to different reasons, such as being irrelevant to the topic, language, study type, or lack of access to the full-text article. 60 articles were finally included in the review. Conclusions: despite the heterogeneity among the included studies, a consensus among the authors on the amount and frequency of orthodontic records was possible. Records taken at the beginning or pre-treatment, after six months of treatment, a year into treatment, when appliances are removed, and two years after the treatment has finished are recommended for interceptive treatments. For corrective treatment, it is suggested that records be taken at the beginning or pre-treatment, a year into the treatment, when the treatment is finished, and two years after the treatment is finished.