Lingual vs. labial fixed orthodontic appliances: systematic review and meta‐analysis of treatment effects

The aim of this systematic review was to compare the therapeutic and adverse effects of lingual and labial orthodontic fixed appliances from clinical trials on human patients in an evidence‐based manner. Randomized and prospective non‐randomized clinical trials comparing lingual and labial appliances were included. Risk of bias within and across studies was assessed using the Cochrane tool and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Random‐effects meta‐analyses were conducted, followed by subgroup and sensitivity analyses. Six electronic databases were searched from inception to July 2015, without limitations. A total of 13 papers pertaining to 11 clinical trials were included with a total of 407 (34% male/66% female) patients. Compared with labial appliances, lingual appliances were associated with increased overall oral discomfort, increased speech impediment (measured using auditory analysis), worse speech performance assessed by laypersons, increased eating difficulty, and decreased intermolar width. On the other hand, lingual appliances were associated with increased intercanine width and significantly decreased anchorage loss of the maxillary first molar during space closure. Based on existing trials, there is insufficient evidence to make robust recommendations for lingual fixed orthodontic appliances regarding their therapeutic or adverse effects, as the quality of evidence was low.