ArticleScientific reports2026
Fit analysis of 3D-printed versus thermoformed clear aligners for labial tooth movement using micro-CT: an in vitro study.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. 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.
- Direct-printed aligners in orthodontics: Integrating digital design, materials science, and clinical biomechanics.Korean journal of orthodontics · 2026Review
- Automated micro-CT quantification of clear aligner fit: a pilot comparison of manufacturing processes.BMC oral health · 2026Article
- Retentive force of thermoformed and direct 3D-printed clear aligners with different margin designs and attachments: anFrontiers in oral health · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study examined the fit of 3D-printed and thermoformed clear aligners (CAs) on activated tooth models using micro-computed tomography (micro-CT). Three evaluation models were prepared: a passive model (P0.0) and two activated models (A0.3 and A0.5, where the upper right central incisor was labially displaced by 0.3 and 0.5 mm, respectively). Three CA material groups were tested: 3D-printed CAs made from TC-85 resin (3DP), thermoformed multi-layer CAs with a copolyester-elastomer combination (TM), and thermoformed single-layer CAs made of polyethylene terephthalate glycol (TS). CAs (n = 10) were fitted to corresponding models and scanned using micro-CT. Gap widths were measured at various tooth positions and measurement points in sagittal sections on all sides under passive and active states. Nonparametric analyses (Kruskal-Wallis tests with Bonferroni-corrected Mann-Whitney U post hoc comparisons) were performed with α = 0.05. The 3DP group exhibited significantly greater overall gap widths than the thermoformed groups (p < 0.001), with no significant effect of activation level (p = 0.350). In contrast, both the TM and TS groups showed significant increases in gap width with increasing activation (p < 0.001). Fit patterns differed by tooth position and measurement point, particularly in activated models, demonstrating distinct material-dependent adaptation behaviors.
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.