ArticleDental press journal of orthodontics2024
Accuracy of Invisalign® aligners in adult patients: a retrospective study of angular tooth movements.
Article in Dental press journal of orthodontics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Evaluating the Clinical Success of Clear Aligners for Rotational Tooth Movements in Adult Patients: A Systematic Review.Dentistry journal · 2025Review
- Predictors of refinement in clear aligner therapy: a retrospective tooth-level study of maxillary anterior teeth.Scientific reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis retrospective study aimed to assess the predictability of Invisalign® aligners regarding rotational, mesio-distal and buccal-lingual tip movements.
methodsTwo materials were included in the analysis - EX30, used until 2013; and SmartTrack, in current use. The study comprised 56 adult patients treated with Invisalign Comprehensive. Data sample were assessed on three sets of digital models; model 1 - initial, model 2 - predicted, and model 3 - achieved. Sixty reference points were marked in each dental arch, and two reference planes assisted the superimposition. The degree of rotation, mesio-distal and buccal-lingual tip was obtained via trigonometric calculations, through a previously published validated method. The accuracy of outcomes was compared according to the types of tooth movement and teeth groups,and the influence of predetermined variables on movement accuracy was also investigated.
resultsRotation and mesio-distal tip did not present any significant difference when comparing EX30 and SmartTrack groups. Only buccal-lingual tip presented a significant difference, incisor and canine groups treated with EX30 aligners presented an increase in accuracy (p= 0.007 and p = 0.007, respectively). For each additional degree planned for rotation movements, there was an increase of 0.35° in the discrepancy, and an increase of 0.40° and 0.41° for mesio-distal and buccal-lingual tip, respectively. EX30 and SmartTrack discrepancies were compared by multilevel linear regression.
conclusionEX30 aligners reached higher accuracy for buccal-lingual tip in anterior teeth. However, for rotation and mesio-distal tip, SmartTrack and EX30 are similarly accurate. The total amount of planned movement has a significant impact on accuracy rates, with a decrease in accuracy for every additional degree.
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.