ArticleClinical oral investigations2026
3D volumetric changes and force delivery at the attachment region of different aligner materials.
Article in Clinical oral investigations, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Ageing effects on chemical, physical, mechanical, and morphological properties of clear aligners - a systematic review.Progress in orthodontics · 2026Pooled it
- In Vitro Comparison of Initial and 7-Day System-Level Resultant Forces in Clear Aligners with Different Layer Structures.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Does Thermoforming Setup Affect Thickness in Thermoplastic Orthodontic Appliances? A Comparison of Single vs. Dual-Model Fabrication.Polymers · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe aim of this in vitro study was to compare the volumetric changes in the attachment regions of two aligner materials subjected to a cyclic insertion-disinsertion model, as well as the influence of a simulated intraoral environment (SIE) on the disinsertion force of the aligners. MATERIALS AND
methodsPassive aligners of each material were obtained from two patients with different intraoral conditions (mild and severe crowding). Half of these aligners were immersed in SIE. Three study times were established at 35, 50, and 75 insertion disinsertion cycles. At each study time, the aligners were scanned with a Trios 3 intraoral scanner, and the STL models obtained were superimposed for comparative analysis of the volumetric change. The mean and maximum disinsertion forces were also quantified.
resultsAn increase in the mean force of disinsertion was observed for both aligner materials after exposure to SIE, with a statistically significant increase observed for material 1 (p < 0.05). Following exposure to SIE, the aligners exhibited a mean rise in maximum disinsertion force of 56.2% in contrast to their performance under ideal conditions. However, there were no statistically significant differences in volumetric changes regardless of the magnitude of crowding and exposure to SIE.
conclusionsExposure to SIE adversely affects aligner deformation and disinsertion resistance. The PET-G based polymer demonstrated a consistently greater tendency toward volumetric change than the Polyutherane-based polymer. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Intraoral aging can significantly affect aligner force and volumetric changes, reducing the predictability of planned tooth movements.
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.