ArticleCureus2023
Impact of Invisalign G-series Updates on Improving Predicted Outcomes: A Retrospective Study.
Article in Cureus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUnderstanding 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.
methodThis 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%).
resultsA 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.
conclusionThe percentage accuracy of aligner therapy administered using the Invisalign G7 and G8 series demonstrated no significant variation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.