Observational studyClinical oral investigations2026
Clinical outcomes of digital straightwire lingual versus labial fixed appliances assessed with American Board of Orthodontics indices: a retrospective cohort study.
Observational study 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 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.
- Dentofacial effects of lingual versus labial fixed appliances in adults treated with four-premolar extractions and skeletal anchorage-supported mechanics : A retrospective comparative cephalometric study.Journal of orofacial orthopedics = Fortschritte der Kieferorthopadie : Organ/official journal Deutsche Gesellschaft fur Kieferorthopadie · 2026Article
- Digital evaluation with ABO eCRE of treatment quality and efficiency with completely customized lingual and prefabricated vestibular appliances in combined orthodontic-orthognathic therapy: a retrospective cohort study.Progress in orthodontics · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesDigitally enabled straightwire lingual systems aim to simplify lingual orthodontics, but evidence based on objective indices remains limited.
methodsThis retrospective observational study included 200 adults treated with fixed appliances and allocated into 4 equal groups (n = 50 each): lingual nonextraction, lingual extraction, labial nonextraction, and labial extraction. Pretreatment severity was scored using the American Board of Orthodontics (ABO) Discrepancy Index (DI), and posttreatment finishing was assessed using the ABO Objective Grading System (OGS) cast–radiograph evaluation. Baseline characteristics were compared using Kruskal–Wallis tests for continuous variables and chi-square tests for categorical variables. OGS total and treatment duration were analyzed using covariate-adjusted ANCOVA via multiple linear regression with an appliance-by-extraction interaction, using heteroskedasticity-robust standard errors.
resultsPretreatment DI total did not differ significantly among the 4 groups (P = 0.149). Mean OGS totals were 17.3 ± 4.5 (lingual nonextraction), 15.7 ± 4.3 (lingual extraction), 16.7 ± 4.4 (labial nonextraction), and 16.2 ± 5.7 (labial extraction). All cases had OGS totals ≤ 25. In adjusted analyses, OGS total showed no significant main effects of appliance type or extraction protocol and no significant interaction (all P > 0.05). Treatment duration was longer with lingual than labial appliances (P = 0.003) and longer in extraction than nonextraction protocols (P < 0.001), with no significant interaction (P = 0.100).
conclusionDigital straightwire lingual treatment achieved posttreatment ABO-OGS outcomes comparable to labial fixed appliances in adults, while requiring longer treatment duration; extraction therapy was also associated with longer treatment time. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: For adult patients seeking an esthetic appliance, digitally enabled straightwire lingual treatment can deliver outcomes comparable to labial appliances.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41790284What 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.