ArticleBMC oral health2025
Incidence and risk factors of alveolar bone dehiscences and fenestrations after clear aligner therapy with Class II elastics: a retrospective study.
Article in BMC oral health, 2025. 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.
- Long-term outcomes of alveolar bone and gingival tissues in modified vs. conventional periodontally accelerated osteogenic orthodontics: a 5-year retrospective analysis.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Factors influencing fenestration and dehiscence in the anterior teeth after clear aligner treatment: a multicenter retrospective study.Progress in orthodontics · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIn clear aligner therapy (CAT), Class II elastics are widely used to reinforce the anchorage during the distalization of upper molars, however, their association with alveolar bone dehiscences (ABDs) and fenestrations (ABFs) in the anterior region remains unclear. The aim of this research is to assess the incidence of ABDs/ABFs in adult patients undergoing non-extraction CAT with Class II elastics, and to explore risk factors associated with the occurrence of ABDs/ABFs.
methodsThirty adult patients with Class II malocclusion who underwent non-extraction CAT with Class II intermaxillary elastics were enrolled in this study. Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) images were obtained before (T0) and immediately after (T1) CAT to assess the occurrence of ABDs/ABFs on the labial and lingual sides of anterior teeth. Chi-square tests were used to compare the incidence of ABDs/ABFs at T0 and T1, meanwhile, binary logistic regression was utilized to analyze the risk factors associated with ABDs/ABFs at T1.
resultsOn the labial side, the incidence of ABDs increased significantly in the mandibular central incisors (from 36.7 to 62.8%, P < 0.05), mandibular lateral incisors (from 36.7 to 70.0%, P < 0.05), mandibular canines (from 31.7 to 53.3%, P < 0.05) and maxillary canines (from 30.0 to 55.0%, P < 0.05). While on the lingual side, it increased significantly in the maxillary central incisors (from 1.7 to 23.3%, P < 0.05), lateral incisors (from 6.7 to 38.3%, P < 0.05), and canines (from 21.7 to 46.7%, P < 0.05). The incidence of ABFs only increased on the labial side of the maxillary canines and mandibular central incisors. The occurrence of maxillary ABDs was strongly associated with the crowding (OR = 1.318, P = 0.007), while the occurrence of the mandibular ABDs was significantly associated with root surface (labial vs. lingual, OR = 1.836, P = 0.008).
conclusionsThe incidence of ABDs/ABFs significantly increased after non-extraction CAT with Class II elastics in adults, especially on the labial root surface of the mandibular anterior teeth. Orthodontists should be well aware of the periodontal risks of CAT with Class II elastics.
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.