Question · asked by 1 review

Open surgical exposure vs Closed surgical exposure: Aesthetics of the treated canine compared with the untreated contralateral canine

Population: People with maxillary palatally displaced (impacted) canines, unilateral or bilateral (children/adolescents; mean ages 14.2 to 17.5 years)
Intervention: Open surgical exposure
Comparison: Closed surgical exposure
Outcome: Aesthetics of the treated canine compared with the untreated contralateral canine

What each review found

Finding	Effect	Studies	GRADE certainty
Open surgical exposure vs Closed surgical exposure Aesthetics of the treated canine compared with the untreated contralateral canine · People with maxillary palatally displaced (impacted) canines, unilateral or bilateral (children/adolescents; mean ages… · End of treatment Open versus closed surgical exposure of canine teeth that are displaced in the roof of the mouth (2017) · Cochrane All outcomes	SoF (Aesthetics, reported in various manners at different time points): 'This outcome was measured in a variety of ways in the studies that cannot be pooled'; quality very low (⊕⊝⊝⊝). Results: Parkin 2012 -…	2 studies	Very low

Findings are shown side by side, never pooled across reviews.

The reviews

Review	Searched up to	Included studies	AMSTAR 2
Open versus closed surgical exposure of canine teeth that are displaced in the roof of the mouth 2017 · Cochrane All outcomes	2017-02	Not listed	Not assessed

How reviews are matched to this question

Reviews word the same question differently. Four decision models (TypeSafe's Jev, Liquid AI's d1-ultra, SubQ Snap and Baseten's Elephant) judged each wording of the population, intervention, comparator and outcome against the others; two wordings count as the same when at least three of them agree and none clearly disagrees, and findings count as this question only when all four elements match. Timing, setting and subgroup never split a question: they are shown on each finding.