Distalization of maxillary molars with Invisalign aligners in nonextraction patients with Class II malocclusion

Taffarel, Itamar Antonio; Gasparello, Gil Guilherme; Júnior, Sergio Luiz Mota; Pithon, Matheus Melo; Taffarel, Ivan Pedro; Meira, Thiago Martins; Tanaka, Orlando Motohiro

doi:10.1016/j.ajodo.2022.07.007

Cited by 15 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Besides, the mesial movement of distalized maxillary molar can occur due to reciprocal forces during the retraction of anterior teeth. Considering these factors, the actual efficacy of maxillary molar distalization using CA might not be as high as previously reported [ 7 ]. Our recent study found the final efficacy of maxillary molar distalization after CA treatment was only 36.48% after treatment complete [ 8 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 75%

Biomechanical analysis of miniscrew-assisted molar distalization with clear aligners: a three-dimensional finite element study

Guo,

Lam,

Zhang

et al. 2023

European Journal of Orthodontics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background/Objectives To compare the biomechanical characteristics of maxillary molar distalization with clear aligners in conjunction with three types of miniscrew anchorage. Materials/Methods Three-dimensional (3D) finite element models of maxillary molar distalization with clear aligners and three types of miniscrew anchorage were established, including (A) control group, (B) direct buccal miniscrew anchorage group, (C) direct palatal miniscrew anchorage group, and (D) indirect buccal miniscrew anchorage group. The 3D displacement of maxillary teeth and the principal stress (maximum tensile and compressive stress) on the root and periodontal ligament (PDL) during molar distalization were recorded. Results The tooth displacement pattern during maxillary molar distalization in the four groups showed similarities, including labial tipping of anterior teeth, mesial and buccal tipping of premolars, and distal and buccal tipping of molars, but with varying magnitudes. Group C exhibited the greatest molar distalization, with the first molar achieving 0.1334 mm of crown distalization. Group D demonstrated a notable buccal crown movement (0.0682 mm) and intrusion (0.0316 mm) of the first premolar. Compared to Groups A and B, Groups C and D showed less labial crown tipping of the central incisor. Group B showed the greatest amount of maxillary incisor intrusion (central incisor: 0.0145 mm, lateral incisor: 0.0094 mm). Moreover, Groups C and D displayed significantly lower levels of compressive and tensile stress in the roots and PDL of the maxillary central and lateral incisors. Limitation Molar distalization is a dynamic process involving sequential tooth movement stages; however, our research primarily examined the tooth movement patterns in the initial aligner. Conclusions/Implications The use of miniscrew anchorage, especially direct palatal miniscrew anchorage, may enhance the treatment efficacy of maxillary molar distalization with clear aligners, leading to increased molar distalization, reduced mesial movement of premolars, and minimized labial tipping of anterior teeth.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 75%

Biomechanical analysis of miniscrew-assisted molar distalization with clear aligners: a three-dimensional finite element study

Guo,

Lam,

Zhang

et al. 2023

European Journal of Orthodontics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Such claims include those clear aligners offers a faster treatment time, invisibility, and precise results predictable through software simulations. Current scientific evidence, however, shows these claims to be untrue [ 23 – 26 ]. The same pattern was followed for the posts about the self-ligating braces [ 27 , 28 ] Propel and Acceledent [ 29 – 31 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Orthodontics social media, perceptions of science- and non-science-based posts among orthodontists, dentists, students and laypeople

Gasparello,

Mota-Júnior,

Hartmann

et al. 2023

PLoS ONE

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Worldwide, social media is gaining popularity year after year. In Brazil, by 2027, there will be more than 188 million users of social media sites, against 165 million in 2022, therefore, the usage of general population and health care professionals, including orthodontists, is increasing. Differently from scientific journals that undergo a rigorous peer review process prior to publication, the same level of demand is not found on social media. Hence, this study aimed to assess whether orthodontists can recognize scientifically based and non-science-based posts and if their perceptions are different from general opinion (laypeople), dentistry students, and dentists (non-orthodontists). The posts were created using the search tool on Instagram with the hashtags #clearaligners #acceledent #selfligatingbraces and #propelorthodontics, four scientific based posts and four without or with low scientific evidence were selected and evaluated through a virtual questionnaire in the QUALTRICS platform by 385 people, (175 laypeople, 102 dentists, 58 dentistry students, and 50 orthodontists) using a visual analogue scale (VAS). In addition, four questions were asked. ANOVA (Adjusted Bonferroni correction) and Pearson’s chi-squared, and Student T tests were applied to identify statistical differences. Significant difference was found only for posts with no scientific evidence between orthodontist’s group when comparing with laypeople (p < 0.001) for the #selfligatingbraces, and the #propelorthodontics for the group orthodontists when compared with laypeople (p = 0.031) and dentists (p = 0.033). Instagram was the favorite social media where most of the participants spend more than 3 h. Of the participants, 97% used social media to keep informed and read the news. Almost half of the respondents search for orthodontics services on social media. Orthodontists were able to perceive differences in only two posts from the general perception (laypeople) regarding non- or low-scientific-evidence posts.

show abstract

“…Among the 41 reports, 30 were excluded because the articles were master theses [35][36][37][38], were reviews or editorials [39][40][41], outcomes were not relevant [14,[42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50][51][52][53][54][55][56][57], had inconsistent data (and could not get the responses from the corresponding author) [58], utilized TADs [59][60][61][62], or had a mixture of upper and lower distalization [63]. Therefore, after adhering to the guidelines presented by the PRISMA, eleven articles were included for final analysis [6,12,17,[24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31].…”

Section: Literature Searching and Study Selectionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Vertical Control in Molar Distalization by Clear Aligners: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Park,

Shen,

Chung

et al. 2024

JCM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Molar distalization is used to correct molar relationships or to create space for mild anterior crowding. However, whether clear aligners can provide proper vertical control with the sequential distalization strategy has been highly debated. Thus, the current study aimed to systematically review the amount of dentoskeletal changes in the vertical dimension that results from sequential molar distalization in clear aligner therapy without temporary anchorage devices (TADs). Methods: Registered with PROSPERO (CRD42023447211), relevant original studies were screened from seven databases and supplemented by a manual search by two investigators independently. Articles were screened against inclusion and exclusion criteria, and a risk of bias assessment was conducted for each included article. Relevant data were extracted from the included articles and meta-analysis was performed using RStudio. Results: Eleven articles (nine for maxillary distalization and two for mandibular distalization) were selected for the final review. All studies have a high or medium risk of bias. For maxillary molar distalization, the meta-analysis revealed 0.26 mm [0.23 mm, 0.29 mm] of maxillary first molar intrusion based on post-distalization dental model analysis, as well as 0.50 mm [−0.78 mm, 1.78 mm] of maxillary first molar intrusion and 0.60 mm [−0.42 mm, 1.62 mm] of maxillary second molar intrusion based on post-treatment lateral cephalometric analysis. Skeletally, there was a −0.33° [−0.67°, 0.02°] change in the SN-GoGn angle, −0.23° [−0.30°, 0.75°] change in the SN-MP angle, and 0.09° [−0.83°, 1.01°] change in the PP-GoGn angle based on post-treatment lateral cephalometric analysis. There was insufficient data for meta-analysis for mandibular molar distalization. Conclusions: No significant changes in vertical dimension were observed, both dentally and skeletally, after maxillary molar distalization with a sequential distalization strategy. However, further studies on this topic are needed due to the high risk of bias in the currently available studies.

show abstract

Distalization of maxillary molars with Invisalign aligners in nonextraction patients with Class II malocclusion

Cited by 15 publications

References 13 publications

Biomechanical analysis of miniscrew-assisted molar distalization with clear aligners: a three-dimensional finite element study

Biomechanical analysis of miniscrew-assisted molar distalization with clear aligners: a three-dimensional finite element study

Orthodontics social media, perceptions of science- and non-science-based posts among orthodontists, dentists, students and laypeople

Vertical Control in Molar Distalization by Clear Aligners: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About