ArticleBMC oral health2026
Comparative evaluation of the skeletal, dental, and soft-tissue effects of twin block, monoblock, and invisalign mandibular advancement appliances.
Article in BMC oral health, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the skeletal, dental, and soft-tissue effects of the Twin Block, Monoblock, and Invisalign Mandibular Advancement (Invisalign MA) appliances used for functional treatment in individuals with skeletal Class II malocclusion. MATERIALS AND
methodsThe study included 45 individuals in the S-MP3cap stage of growth and development who were treated with Monoblock (n = 15), Twin Block (n = 15), or Invisalign MA (n = 15) appliances. Lateral cephalometric radiographs were obtained before functional treatment (T0) and after treatment (T1). A total of 29 measurements were used to assess changes in the dental, skeletal, and soft tissues.
resultsAcross all treatment groups, significant decreases were observed in ANB°, Wits appraisal, overjet, overbite, and skeletal and soft-tissue convexity angles; similarly, significant increases were identified in SNB°, Co-Gn (mm), Pg-Na Perp, FMA°, GoGn-SN°, LFH/TFH, L1-NB°, IMPA°, and the nasolabial angle throughout the treatment period. No statistically significant differences were found among the groups regarding the changes observed in the soft tissues.
conclusionThe Invisalign MA group showed less increase in vertical parameters than the other groups. Maxillary incisor inclinations decreased more significantly in the Invisalign MA group. Mandibular incisor inclination changes were similar between Monoblock and Invisalign MA groups but greater in the Twin Block group. Maxillary molar eruption was comparable between Invisalign MA and Monoblock groups, while Twin Block showed a more pronounced increase. Finally, mandibular advancement angles were similar across all groups.
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.