Extraction is still a contentious and interdisciplinary decision in orthodontics. In certain situations, knowing the relapse rate and treatment results is crucial. However, more research is required to evaluate the efficacy of mandibular incisal extraction (MIE) as a substitute therapy option for patients who are not growing. According to the PICO criteria, this research was conducted in response to a specific focus question: "Is mandibular incisor extraction a common choice in orthodontic treatment planning to resolve the crowing among non-growing patients?" According to the PRISMA criteria, keywords were employed in the data selection procedure. Between 2015 and 2020, human research with MIE in non-growers of both sexes that was published in high-impact, English-language journals was taken into consideration. However, due to stringent inclusion criteria, case reports, systematic reviews, opinions, survey-based cross-sectional research, and studies that were irrelevant to the current investigation were excluded from the many electronic databases "Google Scholar, Pubmed, Clarivate, Cochrane Library, and Saudi Digital Library." After removing duplicates, 1668 of the 6273 studies that were found were registered. Following a review of the abstract and title, 1653 was removed for a variety of reasons. Only eight articles were selected following a qualitative evaluation out of the fifteen that were read throughout the entire test. One reviewer warned of the possibility of bias because all of the evidence presented was level I and II. There was substantial consensus that skeletal class III camouflage and mandibular crowding were the most common signs of MIE. Regarding post-treatment recurrence, there was an ambiguous association between MIE and premolar extraction.
