
pmid: 37498253
This study compared treatment efficacy for specific tooth movements between 2 clear aligner systems (Clarity [3M Oral Care Solutions, St Paul, Minn] and Invisalign [Align Technology, San Jose, Calif]).The study sample included 47 patients (7 males, 40 females; mean age, 36.57 ± 15.97 years) treated with Invisalign and 37 (4 males, 33 females; mean age, 34.30 ± 16.35 years) treated with Clarity aligners who completed their first set of aligners and had an initial refinement scan. Initial and predicted models were obtained from the initial simulated treatment plan. The first model of the refinement scan was labeled as achieved. SlicerCMF software (version 3.1; http://www.slicer.org) was used to superimpose the achieved and predicted digital models over the initial ones with regional superimposition on the relatively stable first molars. Nine hundred forty teeth in the Invisalign system were measured for horizontal, vertical, and angular movements and transverse width and compared with similar measurements of 740 teeth for the Clarity aligners. The deviation from the predicted was calculated and compared between both systems.The deviation achieved from the predicted was significant between the groups for the mandibular interpremolar and intercanine widths (P 0.05).The efficacy of clear aligner therapy systems (Clarity and Invisalign) in treating mild and moderate malocclusions was comparable. Deviation of the achieved movements from the predicted was greatest for rotational and vertical movements.
Male, Adult, Incisor, Young Adult, Treatment Outcome, Adolescent, Tooth Movement Techniques, Orthodontic Appliances, Removable, Humans, Female, Middle Aged, Malocclusion, Software
Male, Adult, Incisor, Young Adult, Treatment Outcome, Adolescent, Tooth Movement Techniques, Orthodontic Appliances, Removable, Humans, Female, Middle Aged, Malocclusion, Software
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 10 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% |
