ArticleBMC oral health2026
Effects of different aligner thicknesses and expansion step sizes on maxillary arch expansion with Invisalign Palatal Expander: a three-dimensional finite element study.
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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study aimed to investigate the biomechanical effects of different aligner thicknesses and expansion step sizes with the Invisalign Palatal Expander (IPE) on the midpalatal suture, teeth, and periodontal tissues during maxillary arch expansion using the finite element method (FEM), thereby facilitating its more precise and effective clinical application.
methodsThree-dimensional (3D) finite element models, including teeth, bilateral maxilla, midpalatal suture, periodontal ligament (PDL), aligner, and attachments, were constructed. Stress distribution and initial displacement of the midpalatal suture, teeth, and PDL were evaluated under three aligner thicknesses (0.5, 1.0, and 1.5 mm) and different step sizes (0.1, 0.2, and 0.3 mm).
resultsDuring expansion with the IPE, increased aligner thickness markedly enhanced the buccal displacement of posterior teeth, increased midpalatal suture initial displacement, and promoted bodily movement rather than tipping, albeit with increased PDL stress. A greater step size increased buccal displacement of the first molar but reduced that of the primary molars. Thicker aligners (≥ 1.0 mm) combined with a larger step size directed mechanical effects posteriorly to a greater degree, promoting greater suture initial displacement in the posterior region.
conclusionThe thickness of the IPE aligner is the dominant factor regulating tooth movement patterns and midpalatal suture initial displacement, while step size modulates the magnitude and distribution of the mechanical response in the posterior maxillary arch. To promote greater posterior midpalatal suture displacement, we recommend using aligners with a thickness of at least 1.0 mm in combination with an appropriately increased step size.
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.