Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39982527›Full record

ArticleClinical oral investigations2025

Three-dimensional comparative analysis of upper central incisors external apical root resorption/ incisive canal changes in first premolar extraction cases: clear aligners Versus passive self-ligating fixed braces.

Waseem S Al-Gumaei, Hu Long, Xiaoqi Zhang, Haoxin Zhang, Yufei Tang, Qingsong Jiang, Guannan Hu, Wenli Lai, Fan Jian

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical oral investigations, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Waseem S Al-GumaeiState Key Laboratory of Oral Diseases and National Clinical Research Centre for Oral Diseases and Department of Orthodontics, West China Hospital of Stomatology, Sichuan University, No.14, Section 3, Ren Min South Road, Chengdu, 610041, China.
Hu LongState Key Laboratory of Oral Diseases and National Clinical Research Centre for Oral Diseases and Department of Orthodontics, West China Hospital of Stomatology, Sichuan University, No.14, Section 3, Ren Min South Road, Chengdu, 610041, China.
Xiaoqi ZhangState Key Laboratory of Oral Diseases and National Clinical Research Centre for Oral Diseases and Department of Orthodontics, West China Hospital of Stomatology, Sichuan University, No.14, Section 3, Ren Min South Road, Chengdu, 610041, China.
Haoxin ZhangState Key Laboratory of Oral Diseases and National Clinical Research Centre for Oral Diseases and Department of Orthodontics, West China Hospital of Stomatology, Sichuan University, No.14, Section 3, Ren Min South Road, Chengdu, 610041, China.
Yufei TangState Key Laboratory of Oral Diseases and National Clinical Research Centre for Oral Diseases and Department of Orthodontics, West China Hospital of Stomatology, Sichuan University, No.14, Section 3, Ren Min South Road, Chengdu, 610041, China.
Qingsong JiangState Key Laboratory of Oral Diseases and National Clinical Research Centre for Oral Diseases and Department of Orthodontics, West China Hospital of Stomatology, Sichuan University, No.14, Section 3, Ren Min South Road, Chengdu, 610041, China.
Guannan HuState Key Laboratory of Oral Diseases and National Clinical Research Centre for Oral Diseases and Department of Orthodontics, West China Hospital of Stomatology, Sichuan University, No.14, Section 3, Ren Min South Road, Chengdu, 610041, China.
Wenli LaiState Key Laboratory of Oral Diseases and National Clinical Research Centre for Oral Diseases and Department of Orthodontics, West China Hospital of Stomatology, Sichuan University, No.14, Section 3, Ren Min South Road, Chengdu, 610041, China. wenlilai@scu.edu.cn.
Fan JianState Key Laboratory of Oral Diseases and National Clinical Research Centre for Oral Diseases and Department of Orthodontics, West China Hospital of Stomatology, Sichuan University, No.14, Section 3, Ren Min South Road, Chengdu, 610041, China. jianfan@scu.edu.cn.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo assess the upper central incisor's (U1) external apical root resorption (EARR) and incisive canal (IC) changes and their influencing factors under clear aligners and passive self-ligating fixed braces in first premolar extraction cases using CBCT. MATERIALS AND

methodsThis retrospective study included 60 participants (120 teeth) with similar baseline characteristics based on the American Board of Orthodontics discrepancy index scores. Participants were divided into clear aligner (CA) and passive self-ligating fixed appliance (FA) groups, with 30 participants per group. Pre- and post-treatment EARR, IC dimensional changes, U1-IC proximity, and orthodontic movements were analyzed through CBCT using Invivo 6.0.3 software. Descriptive and analytical statistics are performed, and a P-value < 0.05 is considered statistically significant.

resultsThe CA group exhibited statistically significantly lower U1-EARR compared to FA group. However, there were no significant differences in overall IC dimensions (P < 0.05). In FA, contact or invasion of U1 with IC are associated with a significant increase in EARR, but not in CA. The invasion also reveals significant reductions in IC dimensions in FA, whereas CA exhibited more limited changes (P < 0.05). Retraction and intrusion were significantly positively correlated with U1-EARR in FA, whereas intrusion only was correlated positively with U1-EARR in CA (P < 0.05). In both FA and CA, there was no significant correlation between the torque and U1 EARR (P > 0.05). Retraction, intrusion, and torque movements had differential impacts on IC dimensions in FA and CA treatments.

conclusionIn this study, our findings indicate that in cases involving the extraction of first premolars, Invisalign® clear aligners may have less U1-EARR than passive self-ligating fixed braces but no significant differences in the overall IC dimensions between both appliances. Clear aligners may reveal better outcomes in U1 EARR/IC changes concerning U1-IC proximity and different orthodontic movements. These findings may be necessary for orthodontists to consider during treatment planning. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Clear aligners may be an appropriate choice in first premolar extraction cases, especially when the U1 is closer to IC or when there is a need for more retraction, intrusion, and torque. Their potential to reduce root resorption while preserving IC dimensions may make them more advantageous over passive self-ligating fixed braces in these scenarios.

Indexed as

BicuspidImaging, Three-DimensionalIncisorOrthodontic Appliances, FixedRoot ResorptionTooth ExtractionAdolescentCone-Beam Computed TomographyFemaleHumansMaleOrthodontic Appliance DesignRetrospective StudiesTooth Movement TechniquesClear alignersExternal apical root resorptionFirst premolar extractionIncisive canal changesPassive self-ligating fixed braces

Identifiers

PMID39982527

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.