Predictability of orthodontic movement with orthodontic aligners: a retrospective study

Luca Lombardo, Angela Arreghini, Fabio Ramina, Luis T Huanca Ghislanzoni, Giuseppe Siciliani, Luca Lombardo, Angela Arreghini, Fabio Ramina, Luis T Huanca Ghislanzoni, Giuseppe Siciliani

Abstract

Background: The aim of this study was to evaluate the predictability of F22 aligners (Sweden & Martina, Due Carrare, Italy) in guiding teeth into the positions planned using digital orthodontic setup.

Methods: Sixteen adult patients (6 males and 10 females, mean age 28 years 7 months) were selected, and a total of 345 teeth were analysed. Pre-treatment, ideal post-treatment-as planned on digital setup-and real post-treatment models were analysed using VAM software (Vectra, Canfield Scientific, Fairfield, NJ, USA). Prescribed and real rotation, mesiodistal tip and vestibulolingual tip were calculated for each tooth and, subsequently, analysed by tooth type (right and left upper and lower incisors, canines, premolars and molars) to identify the mean error and accuracy of each type of movement achieved with the aligner with respect to those planned using the setup.

Results: The mean predictability of movements achieved using F22 aligners was 73.6%. Mesiodistal tipping showed the most predictability, at 82.5% with respect to the ideal; this was followed by vestibulolingual tipping (72.9%) and finally rotation (66.8%). In particular, mesiodistal tip on the upper molars and lower premolars were achieved with the most predictability (93.4 and 96.7%, respectively), while rotation on the lower canines was the least efficaciously achieved (54.2%).

Conclusions: Without the use of auxiliaries, orthodontic aligners are unable to achieve programmed movement with 100% predictability. In particular, although tipping movements were efficaciously achieved, especially at the molars and premolars, rotation of the lower canines was an extremely unpredictable movement.

Keywords: F22 aligner; Movement accuracy; Orthodontic movement; Predictability.

Conflict of interest statement

Ethics approval and consent to participate

The study was performed in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki.

It is a retrospective analysis, and the protocol was approved by the Chairman of Postgraduate School of Orthodontics, University of Ferrara.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Positioning of the 100 reference points per arch (Upper jaw)
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Vestibulolingual tipping: labiolingual inclination of the FACC with respect to the occlusal plane of reference
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Mesiodistal tipping: mesiodistal inclination of the FACC with respect to the occlusal plane of reference
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Rotation: the angle between the mesiodistal axis of the tooth and plane y
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Occlusal plane of reference
Fig. 6
Fig. 6
Accuracy of planned movements by tooth type

References

    1. Sheridan JJ. The Readers’ Corner 2: what percentage of your patients are being treated with Invisalign appliances? J Clin Orthod. 2004;38:544–545.
    1. Kesling HD. Coordinating the predetermined pattern and tooth positioner with conventional treatment. Am J Orthod Oral Surg. 1946;32:285–293. doi: 10.1016/0096-6347(46)90053-1.
    1. Kuo E, Miller RJ. Automated custom-manufacturing technology in orthodontics. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2003;123:578–581. doi: 10.1016/S0889-5406(03)00051-9.
    1. Joffe L. Invisalign: early experiences. J Orthod. 2003;30:348–352. doi: 10.1093/ortho/30.4.348.
    1. Baldwin DK, King G, Ramsay DS, Huang G, Bollen AM. Activation time and material stiffness of sequential removable orthodontic appliances. Part 3: premolar extraction patients. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2008;133:837–845. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.06.025.
    1. Lombardo L, Arreghini A, Maccarrone R, Bianchi A, Scalia S, Siciliani G. Optical properties of orthodontic aligners—spectrophotometry analysis of three types before and after aging. Prog Orthod. 2015;16:41. doi: 10.1186/s40510-015-0111-z.
    1. Zheng M, Liu R, Ni Z, Yu Z. Efficiency, effectiveness and treatment stability of clear aligners: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Orthod Craniofac Res. 2017;26
    1. Wong BH. Invisalign A to Z. 5, May 2002. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2002;121:540–541. doi: 10.1067/mod.2002.123036.
    1. Boyd RL. Complex orthodontic treatment using a new protocol for the Invisalign appliance. J Clin Orthod. 2007;41:525–547.
    1. Lombardo L, Martines E, Mazzanti V, Arreghini A, Mollica F, Siciliani G. Stress relaxation properties of four orthodontic aligner materials: a 24-hour in vitro study. Angle Orthod. 2017;87:11–18. doi: 10.2319/113015-813.1.
    1. Guarneri MP, Lombardo L, Gracco A, Siciliani G. The state of the art of clean aligner technique [in Italian]. Bologna, Italy: Martina Editor. 2013:15–24.
    1. Align Technology, Inc. The Invisalign reference guide. Santa Clara, Calif; 2002.
    1. Boyd RL. Increasing the predictability of quality results with Invisalign. Proceedings of the Illinois Society of Orthodontists; Oak Brook; March 7, 2005.
    1. Kravitz ND, Kusnoto B, BeGole E, Obrez A, Agran B. How well does Invisalign work? A prospective clinical study evaluating the efficacy of tooth movement with Invisalign. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2009;135:27–35. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2007.05.018.
    1. Rossini G, Parrini S, Castroflorio T, Deregibus A, Debernardi CL. Efficacy of clear aligners in controlling orthodontic tooth movement: a systematic review. Angle Orthod. 2015;85(5):881–889. doi: 10.2319/061614-436.1.
    1. Huanca Ghislanzoni LT, Lineberger M, Cevidanes LH, Mapelli A, Sforza C, McNamara JA., Jr Evaluation of tip and torque on virtual study models: a validation study. Prog Orthod. 2013;26:14–19.
    1. Miller RJ, Kuo E, Choi W. Validation of Align Technology’s Treat III digital model superimposition tool and its case application. Orthod Craniofac Res. 2003;6(Suppl 1):143–149. doi: 10.1034/j.1600-0544.2003.247.x.
    1. Ali B, Shaikh A, Fida M. Stability of palatal rugae as a forensic marker in orthodontically treated cases. J Forensic Sci. 2016;61:1351–1355. doi: 10.1111/1556-4029.13129.
    1. Kravitz ND, Kusnoto B, Agran B, Viana G. Influence of attachments and interproximal reduction on the accuracy of canine rotation with Invisalign. A prospective clinical study. Angle Orthod. 2008;78:682–687. doi: 10.2319/0003-3219(2008)078[0682:IOAAIR];2.
    1. Simon M, Keilig L, Schwarze J, Jung BA, Bourauel C. Treatment outcome and efficacy of an aligner technique—regarding incisor torque, premolar derotation and molar distalization. BMC Oral Health. 2014;14:68. doi: 10.1186/1472-6831-14-68.
    1. Nguyen CV, Chen J. (Chapter 14) in: O.C. Tuncay (Ed.) The Invisalign system. New Malden: Quintessence Publishing Company, Ltd; 2006. p. 12–32.
    1. Djeu G, Shelton C, Maganzini A. Outcome assessment of Invisalign and traditional orthodontic treatment compared with the American Board of Orthodontics objective grading system. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2005;128:292–298. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2005.06.002.
    1. Chisari JR, McGorray SP, Nair M, Wheeler TT. Variables affecting orthodontic tooth movement with clear aligners. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop. 2014;145(4 Suppl):S82–S91. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2013.10.022.

Source: PubMed

Sponsors and Collaborators

Medical Conditions

Drug Interventions

3
Subscribe