OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to conduct a meta-analysis of the efficacy of mandibular advance clear alig-ners with traditional functional appliances as the control group. METHODS: PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Library, China Biomedical Abstracts Database, China Knowledge Network Database, Wanfang Database, and Weipu Database were used in this study. The two groups of researchers screened the literature and extracted data based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria established by PICOS entries, and used the ROBINS-I scale for quality evaluation. Revman 5.4 and Stata 17.0 software were used for meta-analysis. RESULTS: Nine clinical controlled trials were included in this study with a total sample size of 283 cases. No significant difference was found in SNA, SNB, ANB, Go-Pog, U1-SN, Overjet, and other aspects between the invisible group and the traditional group in the treatment of skeletal class Ⅱ ma-locclusion patients; there was a 0.90° difference in mandibular plane angle between the two groups; the growth of the mandibular ramus (Co-Go) in the traditional group was 1.10 mm more than that in the invisible group; the lip inclination of the lower teeth in the invisible group was better controlled, 1.94° less than that in the control group. CONCLUSIONS The invisible group can better control the lip inclination of the mandibular anterior teeth when guiding the mandible. Furthermore, the mandibular plane angle (MP-SN) can remain unchanged, but the growth of the mandibular ramus is not as good as the traditional group, and auxiliary measures should be taken to improve it in clinical practice.
Humans ; Malocclusion, Angle Class II/therapy* ; Mandibular Advancement ; Orthodontics, Corrective ; Orthodontic Appliances, Functional ; Mandible ; Orthodontic Appliances, Removable ; Cephalometry