ArticleProgress in orthodontics2025
Force comparison between Perfitalign 4D aligners and thermoformed aligners for mandibular incisor retraction: an in vitro study.
Article in Progress in orthodontics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Static and Dynamic Mechanical Properties of 3D-Printable Aligner Resins: An In Vitro Study with FTIR Chemical Characterization.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2026Article
- Article
- Next-Generation Orthodontics: Functional Resins, Biomechanics, Biocompatibility, and Current Clinical Reality of Direct 3D-Printed Aligners.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2026Review
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
Abstract
objectivesTo quantitatively compare the orthodontic forces exerted during mandibular incisor retraction by Perfitalign 4D aligners and thermoformed aligners over a 60-hour dynamic monitoring period, assess tooth movement trends, and investigate the effects of shape-memory properties on force characteristics. MATERIALS AND
methodsThree groups of aligners were designed for mandibular incisor retraction. Group A aligners were fabricated using Erkodur foils (ERKODENT Erich Kopp) via thermoforming, while Groups B and C were fabricated using DCA resin (LuxCreo) via 3D printing. Groups A and B possessed a step size of 0.15 mm, whereas group C had a step size of 0.20 mm. Force data were monitored on a mandibular model for 60 h using a multi-axis transducer at 4-hour wear intervals. Groups B and C underwent thermal reactivation after every 12 h of cumulative wear, with recordings taken immediately before and after each activation.
resultsAll groups exhibited high repeatability (ICC > 0.9). Perfitalign 4D aligners exhibited significant force recovery after thermal reactivation, though the recovery degree slightly decreased with repeated activations. Vertical forces markedly fluctuated but increased after thermal reactivation. Intergroup comparisons revealed significantly lower lingual forces in groups B/C compared to group A (P < 0.05). For mesiodistal and vertical directions, forces in groups B/C showed no significant reductions compared to group A. Residual stress analysis revealed rapid initial decay in group A, which decelerated subsequently, while groups B and C exhibited cyclic characteristics of "decay-thermal reactivation-induced recovery-decay". At 0 h, moment-to-force ratios (Mx/Fy) for mandibular incisors were significantly lower in groups B/C (- 3.3 to - 8.7 mm) than in group A (- 8.0 to - 10.7 mm).
conclusionPerfitalign 4D aligners enable cyclic force recovery via shape-memory properties, independent of step size (0.15/0.20 mm). Despite larger steps, their lingual forces remained significantly lower than those of thermoformed aligners. A trend closer to bodily movement was observed with Perfitalign 4D aligners, although clinical studies are needed to validate movement efficiency and the long-term effects of elevated mesiodistal/vertical forces.
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.