ReviewJournal of orthodontic science2025
Maxillary arch development with clear aligners: A comprehensive scoping review.
Review in Journal of orthodontic science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis scoping review aims to evaluate the efficacy and limitations of clear aligner therapy (CAT), particularly Invisalign, in the transverse development of the maxillary arch. With increasing demand for esthetic, removable orthodontic alternatives, clear aligners are used beyond mild crowding to manage arch expansion and crossbites. MATERIALS AND
methodsA comprehensive search of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar, Elsevier, and National Center for Biotechnology Information was conducted to identify English-language studies published between 2020 and 2024. Keywords used included "maxillary arch development," "CAT," and "Invisalign." After applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, eight studies were included from an initial 3,190 identified records. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) framework guided the selection process.
resultsThe included studies demonstrated that clear aligners can achieve maxillary expansion primarily through buccal tipping of posterior teeth. However, bodily movement remains limited. The predictability of expansion outcomes varied, with cusp width changes being more reliable than root or gingival-level movements. One study found an expansion efficiency of over 90% at the first premolar cusp, while others noted discrepancies between planned and achieved outcomes.
conclusionClear aligners demonstrate moderate effectiveness for maxillary arch expansion through dental tipping, especially in mild to moderate cases. However, they are less predictable for bodily movement or large-scale skeletal changes. Further high-quality, controlled trials are required to validate these outcomes and optimize treatment protocols.
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.