Background: Understanding the real-world implications of periodic changes to orthodontic appliances can provide valuable insights for future treatment strategies and patient outcomes. This study aimed to investigate the impact of the latest updates added to the G7 and G8 Invisalign series on actual versus predicted outcomes and the percentage accuracy of the treatment.
Method: This retrospective study was conducted in private orthodontic practices in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Orthodontists carried out Invisalign® treatment using the latest updates added to the G7 and G8 Invisalign series. The study group comprised patients with different malocclusion types who received non-extraction Invisalign treatment. The Invisalign treatment plan was provided by the ClinChecks program (Invisalign, San Jose, United States) for patients treated throughout the years (2016-2022). Different dimensions were assessed to record predicted and actual treatment outcomes with the aid of iTero® (Align Technology, San Jose, United States) and ClinCheck® (Invisalign, San Jose, United States). The percentage accuracy was determined using the formula (100%-((Predicted-Actual)/Predicted) *100%).
Results: A total of 108 patients (male = 34 (31.5%) and female = 74 (68.5%)) treated with Invisalign G7 and G8 series were considered in this study. The overall mean and standard deviation values of vertical distance (2.91±1.42), intermolar distance in the lower arch (52.68±3.15), overjet (2.71±1.06), and inter-incisal angle (138.24±12.18) were higher than the predicted model. However, the predicted model showed higher mean and standard deviation values for intercanine distances in the upper (36.94±1.57) and lower arches (28.48±1.40) and upper intermolar distances (57.21±2.91). The G7 versus G8 intercanine distance in lower (61.28±47.67 vs. 80.51±38.32), intermolar distance in upper (61.72±47.67 vs. 69.95±44.11), and intermolar distance in lower (100.68±3.80 vs. 100.89±2.52) were relatively higher in the G8 series than the G7. The accuracy percentage was higher with the G8 series than with the G7 regarding the intercanine distance in the upper arch. In contrast, the G7 series showed a higher mean percentage accuracy of vertical distance (91.11±84.83 vs. 76.76±65.45), overjet (58.44±35.17 vs. 53.71±45.87), and inter-incisal angle (34.47±44.06 vs. 27.53±37.98) than the G8 series.
Conclusion: The percentage accuracy of aligner therapy administered using the Invisalign G7 and G8 series demonstrated no significant variation.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10788698 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.7759/cureus.50615 | DOI Listing |
Eur J Orthod
December 2024
Post-Graduate program in Dentistry, Faculty of Dentistry, Federal University of Pará (UFPA), Rua Augusto Correa 01, Belém, Pará 66075-110, Brazil.
Background: The clinical protocol and effectiveness of dental expansion with Clear Aligner Therapy (CAT), especially among adults is still unclear. There is a need to map and explore knowledge gaps of dental expansion with CAT among children and adults.
Objective: This scoping review explores the extent and depth of the available literature regarding the effectiveness and predictability of CAT in performing orthodontic expansion in both children and adults.
BMC Oral Health
October 2024
Department of Prosthodontics, Guanghua School and Hospital of Stomatology, Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Stomatology, Institute of Stomatological Research, Sun Yat-sen University, No. 56 Lingyuan West Road, Guangzhou, 510080, Guangdong Province, China.
Background: Prosthetically guided orthodontics (PGO) can correct the malocclusion for better prosthetic rehabilitation in esthetic rehabilitation. Unlike conventional orthodontic treatment, only minor tooth movement is designed in PGO according to the requirement of subsequent restoration. For better appearance during the treatment, PGO is often performed with clear aligners, which have no metal brackets.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFCureus
September 2024
Pediatric and Preventive Dentistry, Saveetha Dental College and Hospital, Saveetha Institute of Medical and Technical Sciences, Saveetha University, Chennai, IND.
Anterior crossbite, a misalignment of the upper front teeth in which the bite is behind the lower front teeth, is a common dental condition in mixed dentition. This case series examines the clinical results of three orthodontic appliances, namely Catlan's appliance, the removable finger-spring appliance, and the 2x4 appliance, in the management of anterior crossbite. The first case study involves a seven-year-old patient with a single-tooth crossbite.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFObjectives: To determine whether the achieved mandibular central incisor lingual root torque (LRT) changes matched the planned changes after treatment with an initial series of Invisalign aligners when ≥10° of torque change was planned.
Materials And Methods: A sample of adult patients who underwent treatment with the Invisalign appliance between 2013 and 2021 were evaluated. The pretreatment, planned, and achieved posttreatment digital models were measured using Geomagic Control X metrology software.
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop
December 2024
Orthodontic Unit, Adelaide Dental School, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia. Electronic address:
Introduction: Data regarding the efficacy of deep overbite correction with clear aligner therapy in adolescent patients are lacking. This study aimed to investigate the efficacy of deep overbite reduction in adolescent patients treated with Invisalign (Align Technology, San Jose, Calif) aligners.
Methods: This retrospective study investigated a sample of 102 patients aged 10-17 years from a large database.
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!