Effect of material composition and thickness of orthodontic aligners on the transmission and distribution of forces: an in vitro study.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the effects of material type and thickness on force generation and distribution by aligners. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty aligners were divided into six groups (n = 10): one group with a thickness of 0.89 mm using Zendura Viva (Multi-layer), four groups with a thickness of 0.75 mm using Zendura FLX (Multi-layer), CA Pro (Multi-layer), Zendura (Single-layer), and Duran (Single-layer) sheets, and one group with a thickness of 0.50 mm using Duran sheets. Force measurements were conducted using Fuji® pressure-sensitive films. RESULTS: The lowest force values, both active and passive, were recorded for the multi-layered sheets: CA Pro (83.1 N, 50.5 N), Zendura FLX (88.9 N, 60.7 N), and Zendura Viva (92.5 N, 68.5 N). Conversely, the highest values were recorded for the single-layered sheets: Duran (131.9 N, 71.8 N) and Zendura (149.7 N, 89.8 N). The highest force was recorded at the middle third of the aligner, followed by the incisal third, and then the cervical third. The net force between the incisal and cervical thirds (FI-FC) showed insignificant difference across different materials. However, when comparing the incisal and middle thirds, the net force (FI-FM) was higher with single-layered materials. Both overall force and net force (FI-FM) were significantly higher with 0.75 mm compared to those with a thickness of 0.50 mm. CONCLUSIONS: Multi-layered aligner materials exert lower forces compared to their single-layered counterparts. Additionally, increased thickness in aligners results in enhanced retention and greater force generation. For effective bodily tooth movement, thicker and single-layered rigid materials are preferred. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This research provides valuable insights into the biomechanics of orthodontic aligners, which could have significant clinical implications for orthodontists. Orthodontists might use this information to more effectively tailor aligner treatments, considering the specific tooth movement required for each individual patient. In light of these findings, an exchangeable protocol for aligner treatment is suggested, which however needs to be proven clinically. This protocol proposes alternating between multi-layered and single-layered materials within the same treatment phase. This strategy is suggested to optimize treatment outcomes, particularly when planning for a bodily tooth movement.

Measuring Maxillary Posterior Tooth Movement: A Model Assessment using Palatal and Dental Superimposition.

Since the introduction of Invisalign by Align Technology, Inc. in 1999, questions and debates have persisted regarding the precision of Invisalign (clear aligner) therapy, particularly when compared to the use of traditional fixed appliances. This becomes particularly significant in cases involving anteroposterior, vertical, and transverse corrections, where precise comparisons are of paramount importance. To address these inquiries, this study introduces a meticulously devised protocol, placing a primary emphasis on digitally superimposing the movement of maxillary posterior teeth to facilitate accurate analysis. The sample included 25 patients who had completed their first series of Invisalign (clear) aligners. Four maxillary digital models (pre-treatment, post-treatment, ClinCheck-initial, and final models) were digitally superimposed using the palate rugae and dentitions as stable references. A software combination was used for model superimposition and tooth segmentation. Transformation matrices then expressed the differences between the achieved and predicted tooth positions. Thresholds for clinically relevant differences were at ±0.25 mm for linear displacement and ±2° for rotation. Differences were assessed using Hotelling's T-squared tests with Bonferroni correction. The mean differences in rotation (2.036° ± 4.217°) and torque (-2.913° ± 3.263°) were significant statistically and clinically, with p-values of 0.023 and 0.0003 respectively. De-rotation of premolars and torque control for all posterior teeth were less predictable. All mean differences for the linear measurements were statistically and clinically insignificant, except that the first molars seemed slightly (0.256 mm) more intruded than their predicted position. The clear aligner system appears to meet its prediction for most translational tooth movements and mesial-distal tipping in maxillary posterior teeth for non-extraction cases with mild to moderate malocclusions.

Correlating Frictional Forces Generated by Different Bracket Types during Sliding and Surface Topography Using Scanning Electron Microscopy and Optical Profilometer.

AIM: The study aims to correlate the frictional forces (FF) of four different types of commercially available ceramic brackets to their surface topography. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two monocrystalline (MC) brackets (CLEAR™, Adanta, Germany; Inspire ICE™, Ormco, USA), one polycrystalline (PC) bracket (Symetri Clear™, Ormco, USA), one clear hybrid esthetic bracket (DISCREET™, Adanta, Germany), and a stainless-steel (SS) bracket (Victory™, 3M Unitek, USA) served as control. Both static friction (SF) and kinetic friction (KF) were recorded during sliding using an Instron universal machine in dry settings. The bracket slot surface topography was evaluated. A scanning electron microscope (SEM) and a profilometer machine were used for assessment before and after sliding. RESULTS: Frictional forces values during sliding were as follows in descending order; Inspire ICE™, CLEAR™, DISCREET™, Symetri Clear™, and, lastly, Victory™. Also, DISCREET™ scored the highest in surface roughness (Sa) values followed by Symetri Clear™. None of the correlations were statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Frictional forces produced during sliding were not always directly related to surface roughness. Monocrystalline ceramic brackets appeared to have the greatest FF and a low surface roughness. Furthermore, DISCREET™ scored a very low frictional value comparable to metal brackets yet showed the highest surface roughness. Metal brackets exhibited the greatest surface smoothness before sliding and the least SF. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: Predicting the FFs produced during sliding mechanics would help the practitioner while choosing the bracket system to be used, and while planning the treatment mechanics, how much force to deliver, and how much tooth movement to expect. How to cite this article: AlBadr AH, Talic NF. Correlating Frictional Forces Generated by Different Bracket Types during Sliding and Surface Topography Using Scanning Electron Microscopy and Optical Profilometer. J Contemp Dent Pract 2024;25(1):41-51.

Environmental sustainability of post-orthodontic dental retainers: a comparative life-cycle assessment of Hawley and Essix retainers.

BACKGROUND: Environmental sustainability has been brought into the limelight due to the global climate crisis. This crisis is driven by human activities and even the healthcare sector is no exception. Within dentistry, orthodontics is a large global market; hence, the use of post-orthodontic retainers has a significant environmental footprint. The aim of this study was to determine the environmental sustainability of post-orthodontic retention using Hawley and Essix retainers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A comparative life-cycle assessment (LCA) was carried out to compare the environmental impact of both retainers. All inputs and outputs were accounted for using the Ecoinvent database, v3.7.1, and openLCA software. Sixteen impact categories were used to determine their environmental burden. RESULTS: Of the 16 impact categories, the Hawley had a greater environmental burden than the Essix retainer in 12 categories. The Hawley's most significant contributors to its impact values are factory manufacturing and in-house production, with an average of 41.45% and 52.52%, respectively. For the Essix, the greatest contributor is factory manufacturing, with an average of 64.63%. However, when factoring in the lifespan of the retainers, the Essix would have a greater environmental impact than the Hawley retainer. LIMITATIONS: This study employed a comparative LCA. There were also assumptions made, but these were supported by research. CONCLUSIONS: On the basis of the evidence gathered in this study, Hawley retainers are more environmentally sustainable than Essix retainers. These results would better enable clinicians to factor in the environmental impact and make informed decisions on the choice of retainer type.

Success rates of single-thread and double-thread orthodontic miniscrews in the maxillary arch.

AIM: There is limited research on the clinical performance of double-thread orthodontic miniscrews. This study aimed to compare the stability of double-thread and single-thread orthodontic miniscrews and identify the potential associations between patient-related and location-related factors with miniscrew stability. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study involved 90 orthodontic miniscrews (45 single-thread, 45 double-thread) with identical dimensions (8 mm length, 1.6 mm diameter). The screws were inserted in various locations within the upper jaw of 83 patients (54 females, 29 males; mean age = 15.1 ± 2.4 years). Failure was defined as excessive mobility or loss of miniscrew after placement. The data recorded were patient age, gender, insertion site, side of insertion (buccal or lingual), duration of force application, and failure occurrence. RESULTS: The overall success rate within the sample was 92.2%. Double-thread miniscrews exhibited a significantly higher success rate than single-thread miniscrews (P = 0.049), with 97.8% and 86.7% success rates, respectively. Gender, age, insertion location, and side of insertion did not show significant associations with failure (P > 0.05). Log-rank analysis revealed a significant difference between the two groups (P = 0.046), indicating a higher probability of survival for the double-thread design. CONCLUSIONS: The overall success rate of orthodontic miniscrews was high in the present sample. Double-thread miniscrews placed in various locations within the maxillary arch demonstrated superior stability and survival rates compared to their single-thread counterparts. Therefore, double-thread miniscrews may be preferred when bone quality is inadequate, such as in young patients.

Influence of fixed orthodontic steel retainers on gingival health and recessions of mandibular anterior teeth in an intact periodontium - a randomized, clinical controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: Aim of this randomized clinical controlled trial was to evaluate the influence of fixed orthodontic steel retainers on gingival health and recessions of mandibular anterior teeth. MATERIALS AND METHODS: After end of the orthodontic treatment, patients were randomly assigned into the test (fixed steel retainer) or control group (modified removable vacuum-formed retainer). Periodontal parameters (periodontal probing depth: PPD; recession: REC; bleeding on probing: BOP) as well as plaque and gingival index were assessed on mandibular anterior teeth directly before attaching/handing over the retainer (baseline: BL), 6 and 12 months after orthodontic treatment. RESULTS: 37 patients (test: n = 15, mean age: 16.1±4.2 years; control: n = 17, mean age: 17.1±5.4 years) completed the study. REC and PPD failed to show significant pairwise differences. The number of patients showing gingival health in the area of the mandibular anterior teeth (test: BL n = 10, 6 months n = 9, 12 months n = 11; control: BL n = 10, 6 months n = 16, 12 months n = 15) revealed a significant difference for the intra-group comparison between BL and 6 months in the control group (p = 0.043). The inter-group comparisons failed to show significant differences. CONCLUSION: Young orthodontically treated patients with fixed steel retainers show in 73.3% healthy gingival conditions after one year which are comparable to the control group (88.2%). Gingival recessions were in a clinically non-relevant range at any time of the examination. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: DRKS00016710.

A scanning electron microscopy investigation of the precision of three orthodontic bracket slot systems.

OBJECTIVE: One of the most imprortant factors in achieving ideal teeth positions is the precision of the slot dimensions of orthodontic brackets into the archwires are inserted.This study aimed to assess the accuracy of the dimensions of orthodontic bracket slots and molar buccal tube apertures and to compare them with the specifications provided by the manufacturers. METHOD: A total of sixty brackets and ten molar buccal tubes with varying slot heights were examined using a scanning electron microscope from the mesial side. The dimensions and morphology of these bracket slots and buccal tubes apertures were assessed using the AutoCAD Software. A one-sample t-test was conducted to compare the measurements with the values provided by the manufacturer. RESULTS: The findings of the present study indicated that the height of the measured bracket slots and buccal tube apertures dimensions were significantly larger than the actual dimensions and exhibiting divergent walls. On the other hand, the depth of the brackets slots showed significantly smaller values than the actual one. CONCLUSION: A need for careful consideration when selecting a commercially accessible brand for everyday use is essential as certain materials may not meet acceptable standards.

Stability, survival, patient satisfaction, and cost-minimization of CAD/CAM versus conventional multistranded fixed retainers in orthodontic patients: a 2-year follow-up of a two-centre randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: CAD/CAM (computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing) fixed retainers (FRs) as an alternative to multistranded FRs to maintain orthodontic treatment outcome. OBJECTIVES: The primary aim was to compare CAD/CAM versus conventional multistranded FRs in terms of stability until 2 years. Secondary outcomes were failure rates, patient satisfaction, and cost-minimization. TRIAL DESIGN: 2-arm parallel, two-centre randomized controlled trial. METHODS: Patients were randomized to CAD/CAM or conventional FRs in both arches, in a 1:1 ratio and blocks of four. Allocation concealment was secured by using sequentially numbered envelopes. Patients were blinded. FRs were bonded at the end of treatment, and patients were recalled after 12 and 24 months. First-time retainer failures were recorded and digital impressions were taken. Arch widths and lengths, as well as Little's Irregularity Index (LII), were measured. Additionally, patients answered satisfaction questionnaires. Linear mixed models were applied for measurements and patient satisfaction. Survival analyses were estimated with Kaplan-Meier curves, along with Cox-regression modelling. Cost-minimization analysis was undertaken. RESULTS: One hundred and eighty-one patients were randomized (98 in Centre 1, and 83 in Centre 2): 90 in CAD/CAM and 91 in conventional group. One hundred and fifty three patients attended T24 follow-up. There were no significant differences in LII and arch dimensions between groups for failure-free patients. Within 24 months, 34% maxillary CAD/CAM FRs and 38% maxillary conventional FRs failed, along with 42% mandibular CAD/CAM FRs and 40% mandibular conventional FRs, with no significant difference in survival between groups (hazard ratios conventional to CAD/CAM: maxillary arch: 1.20 [P = 0.46], mandibular arch: 0.98 [P = 0.94]). There were no significant differences in patient satisfaction between groups. No harms were observed. Cost-minimization analysis showed that CAD/CAM FRs were slightly cheaper than conventional FRs. CONCLUSIONS: There were no clinically significant differences in LII, arch widths, and lengths between CAD/CAM and conventional FRs after 24 months. There were no differences in failures and patient satisfaction between groups. CAD/CAM FRs were slightly cheaper than conventional FRs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04389879.

Comparison of efficacy of thermoplastic retainer with round and rectangular bonded lingual wire retainer in the mandible two years after orthodontic treatment: a randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To analyse three protocols in maintaining the stability of orthodontic therapy results and their effect on gingival health. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty-six subjects (pre-therapeutic age 11-18 years; 68% female) randomly allocated into three retention groups of equal size were analysed. The first group had a 0.673 × 0.268 mm (0.027 × 0.011 inches) rectangular braided steel retention wire bonded to the lingual surfaces of all mandibular teeth from canine to canine, and the second group had a 0.406 mm (0.016 inches) round twisted steel wire. The third group was the control, without wires, and only with vacuum-formed retainers. All three groups had vacuum-formed removable retainers in the maxilla. The frequency of wire detachment/breakage/loss of retainer, the occurrence of crowding of mandibular incisors, and changes in intercanine width and gingival health were monitored. RESULTS: Incidence and severity of relapse differed between groups (p = 0.001 and 0.049) being most common in the removable retainer group (incidence 68.2%; severity 0.7 ± 1.0 mm), followed by the round wire group (36.4%; 0.5 ± 1.2 mm) and rectangular wire group (13.6%; 0.1 ± 0.1 mm). The intercanine width decreased more without a bonded retainer (incidence 68.2%; severity 0.5 ± 0.7 mm) and with the round wire more (45.5%; 0.5 ± 0.7 mm) than with the rectangular (27.3%; 0.1 ± 0.3 mm). The difference was significant for incidence (p = 0.025), but not severity. Detaching of the wires/breakage/loss of retainer was similar. There were no significant differences in the accumulation of biofilm, calculus and gingivitis between appliances. CONCLUSION: A rectangular wire is the most effective in retention, and the impact of retention appliances on gingival health is similar. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05121220. Registered 02 October 2021 - Retrospectively registered. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Studying guidelines for reducing relapse, proper use of materials and appliances, the behavior of retention wires according to their profile in the retention phase, and possibilities of maintaining oral health will contribute to improving the stability of orthodontic therapy results.

Numerical biomechanical finite element analysis of different trimming line designs of orthodontic aligners: An in silico study.

BACKGROUND: A finite element model was used to investigate the effect of different designs and thicknesses of orthodontic aligner margins on their biomechanical behavior. METHODS: A three-dimensional data set of an upper jaw was imported into the 3-matic software. The upper right central incisor tooth (Tooth 11) was separated from the remaining model, and its periodontal ligament and surrounding bone were designed. Aligners were designed with four different trimming lines (scalloped, straight, scalloped extended, straight extended), each with four different thicknesses (0.3, 0.4, 0.5, and 0.6 mm). The models were imported into a finite element package (Marc/Mentat). A linear elastic constitutive material model was applied. A facial 0.2 mm bodily malalignment of tooth 11 was simulated. RESULTS: The maximum resultant force was in the range of 1.0 N to 2.2 N. The straight trimming designs deliver higher resultant forces compared with scalloped trimming designs. Increasing the aligner thickness and/or extending the aligner edge beyond the gingival line leads to an increase in the resultant force. All designs showed an uneven distribution of the normal contact forces over the tooth surface with a predominant concentration toward the cervical third and distal third, particularly with the extended trimming designs. All designs showed uncontrolled tipping of the tooth. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the current model outcomes, the use of a straight extended trimming line design for aligners is favored because of its positive impact on force distribution and, consequently, the control of tooth movement. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: These findings provide aligner companies and orthodontists a valuable biomechanical evidence and guidance to enhance control over tooth movement and therefore optimize treatment outcomes. This can be achieved by trimming the edges of aligners with a straight extended design and selecting the appropriate aligner thickness.

Relapse and failure rates between CAD/CAM and conventional fixed retainers: a 2-year follow-up of a randomized controlled clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Retention has been always considered a major challenge in orthodontics. Recently computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD/CAM) fixed retainers (FRs) have been introduced as a marked development in retainer technology, offering potential advantages. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare the differences in relapse and failure rates in patients treated with FRs using CAD/CAM technology, lab-based technique, and chairside method. TRIAL DESIGN: A double-blinded, prospective, randomized controlled clinical trial was conducted over a 2-year period at a single centre. INTERVENTIONS: These patients were divided into three groups: CAD/CAM group with multistranded Stainless Steel wires (CAD/CAM, n = 14), lab group with the same multistranded wires (lab, n = 15), and a chairside group with Stainless Steel Ortho-FlexTech wires (chairside, n = 14). OUTCOMES: Inter-canine width (ICW) and Little's irregularity index were digitally measured from scans at the orthodontic debonding (T1), 6-month retention (T2), 1-year retention (T3), and 2-year retention (T4) visits. All forms of failure were documented and analyzed. RANDOMIZATION: Participants were randomly assigned to the three groups using online randomization software (randomization.com) by a statistician who was not involved in the study. BLINDING: Patients were blinded in terms of the FR group to which they were each randomly assigned. The principal investigator was blinded upon data analysis since patients' records were coded to minimize observer and measurement bias. RESULTS: Initially 81 patients were assessed for eligibility. Seventy-five patients were randomly allocated into the three study groups. After 2-year follow-up, 43 patients came back for the follow-up and were analyzed. The CAD/CAM group showed significantly less reduction in ICW compared to the chairside group at all time intervals (P < .05) and compared to the lab group at 6 months (P = .038). In terms of LII, the CAD/CAM group exhibited significantly less change than the chairside and lab groups at all time intervals (P < .05). The CAD/CAM group had the lowest failure rate (21.4%), followed by chairside group (28.6%) and then lab group (33.3%), however the differences were insignificant. No harms were observed in the current study. CONCLUSION: Within 2 years of fixed retention, CAD/CAM FRs showed significantly less relapse than lab-based and chairside FRs. However, there was no significant difference in failure rates among the groups. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT05915273.

Cephalometric and digital model analysis of dentoskeletal effects of infrazygomatic miniscrew vs. Essix- anchored Carriere Motion appliance for distalization of maxillary buccal segment: a randomized clinical trial.

TRIAL DESIGN: Parallel. OBJECTIVE: To compare skeletally anchored Carriere Motion appliance (CMA) for distalization of the maxillary buccal segment vs. Essix anchored CMA. METHODS: Thirty-two class II malocclusion patients were randomly allocated into two equal groups. One group was treated with infrazygomatic (IZC) miniscrew- anchored CMA (IZCG) and the other group treated with Essix retainer- anchored CMA (EXG). Two lateral cephalograms and two digital models for upper and lower arches were taken for each patient: immediately before intervention and after distalization had been completed. RESULTS: Distalization period was not significantly different between the two groups. In contrast to EXG, IZCG showed insignificant difference in ANB, lower incisor proclination, and mesial movement of the lower first molar. There was significant rotation with distal movement of maxillary canine and first molar in both groups. CONCLUSION: IZC anchored CMA could eliminate the side effects of class II elastics regarding lower incisor proclination, mesial movement lower molars with a more significant amount of distalization of the maxillary buccal segment but with significant molar rotation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The ClinicalTrials.gov Protocol Registration and Results System (PRS) has this RCT registered as (NCT05499221) on 12/08/2022.

Comparative assessment of orthodontic clear aligner versus fixed appliance for anterior retraction: a finite element study.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study is to conduct a comparative evaluation of different designs of clear aligners and examine the disparities between clear aligners and fixed appliances. METHODS: 3D digital models were created, consisting of a maxillary dentition without first premolars, maxilla, periodontal ligaments, attachments, micro-implant, 3D printed lingual retractor, brackets, archwire and clear aligner. The study involved the creation of five design models for clear aligner maxillary anterior internal retraction and one design model for fixed appliance maxillary anterior internal retraction, which were subsequently subjected to finite element analysis. These design models included: (1) Model C0 Control, (2) Model C1 Posterior Micro-implant, (3) Model C2 Anterior Micro-implant, (4) Model C3 Palatal Plate, (5) Model C4 Lingual Retractor, and (6) Model F0 Fixed Appliance. RESULTS: In the clear aligner models, a consistent pattern of tooth movement was observed. Notably, among all tested models, the modified clear aligner Model C3 exhibited the smallest differences in sagittal displacement of the crown-root of the central incisor, vertical displacement of the central incisor, sagittal displacement of the second premolar and second molar, as well as vertical displacement of posterior teeth. However, distinct variations in tooth movement trends were observed between the clear aligner models and the fixed appliance model. Furthermore, compared to the fixed appliance model, significant increases in tooth displacement were achieved with the use of clear aligner models. CONCLUSIONS: In the clear aligner models, the movement trend of the teeth remained consistent, but there were variations in the amount of tooth displacement. Overall, the Model C3 exhibited better torque control and provided greater protection for posterior anchorage teeth compared to the other four clear aligner models. On the other hand, the fixed appliance model provides superior anterior torque control and better protection of the posterior anchorage teeth compared to clear aligner models. The clear aligner approach and the fixed appliance approach still exhibit a disparity; nevertheless, this study offers a developmental direction and establishes a theoretical foundation for future non-invasive, aesthetically pleasing, comfortable, and efficient modalities of clear aligner treatment.

Comparison between effects of mini-implant anchorage and face-bow anchorage in orthodontics for children.

To study the values of mini-implant anchorage in orthodontics for children in the mixed dentition stage, 78 children in the mixed dentition stage who had accepted orthodontic treatment in our hospital from January 2020 to January 2021 were enrolled into this study. All children were treated with straight-wire appliance. According to their anchorages, children were divided into observation group and control group based on the random number table. Children in the control group used face-bow to control the anchorages and children in the observation group used mini-implants to control the anchorages. After treatment, the upper central incisor convex distance difference, inclination angle of the upper central incisor, displacement of the molar, gingival health, masticatory function, treatment effect and adverse reaction rate of children in two groups were compared. One year after treatment, compared with children in the control group, children in the observation group had smaller the upper central incisor convex distance difference, inclination angle of the upper central incisor, displacement of the molar, small scores of plaque index (PLI), bleeding index (BI) and gingival index (GI), stronger biting force and higher masticatory efficiency, lower adverse reaction rate during treatment, better treatment effect, higher satisfaction of orthodontic treatment. And differences of all the above indexes were statistically significant (p < 0.05). Mini-implant anchorages have good stability and directive force, and have certain values in orthodontics for children in the mixed dentition stage.

Effectiveness of miniscrew-supported maxillary molar distalization according to temporary anchorage device features and appliance design: systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effectiveness of distalizing maxillary first molars (U6) by temporary anchorage devices (TADs) according to their location (palatal, buccal, and zygomatic), their number, and appliance design. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An electronic search of maxillary molar distalization with TADs was done through April 2023. After study selection, data extraction, and risk-of-bias assessment, meta-analyses were performed for the extent of distalization, distal tipping, and vertical movement of U6 using the generic inverse variance and random-effects model. The significance level was set at 0.05. RESULTS: Forty studies met the inclusion criteria: 4 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), 13 prospective studies, and 23 retrospective studies (total of 1182 patients). Distalization of the U6 was not significantly greater (P = .64) by palatal (3.74 mm) and zygomatic (3.68 mm) than by buccal (3.23 mm) TADs. Distal tipping was significantly higher (P < .001) in nonrigid (9.84°) than in rigid (1.97°) appliances. Vertical movement was mostly intrusive and higher but not significantly different (P = .28) in zygomatic anchorage (-1.16 mm). CONCLUSIONS: Distalization of U6 with TADs can be an effective and stable treatment procedure, especially when performed with rigid palatal appliances. However, further RCTs or prospective cohort studies are strongly recommended to provide more clinical evidence.

Invisible treatment with lingual appliance for the correction of an adult class II subdivision with asymmetrical Wilson and Spee curves: A case report.

This article describes a class II subdivision malocclusion successfully treated by an invisible lingual appliance. The combination of en-masse distalization by interradicular palatal mini-screws and inner unilateral class II auxiliaries, first by intermaxillary elastic, later by a class II coil spring, resulted in a dento-alveolar correction, allowing one to maintain the appliance completely invisible. At the same time, the inclination of buccal sectors was normalized by a correct torque expression with set-up overcorrections, resulting in a significant improvement of the buccal corridors. This case report demonstrates the possibility of successfully solving class II division 2 subdivision malocclusion in adult patients without surgery by means of a completely invisible appliance. It also demonstrates that correct levelling and torque expression, for the correction of asymmetrical Spee and Wilson curves, are achievable with an accurate set-up planning. On the other hand, it underlines the necessity of mini-screws, auxiliaries and set-up overcorrections in order to obtain the best results.

Stability and failure rate during 3 years of fixed retention: A follow-up of an randomized clinical trial on adolescents with four different lingual retainers.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate stability outcomes and failure rates associated with four types of lingual retainers: (1) dead-soft wire, (2) multistrand stainless steel (SS) wire, (3) CAD/CAM nitinol, and (4) connected bonding pads (CBPs) after 3 years of retention. METHODS: This study enrolled 96 patients (66 females, 30 males) with a median age of 19 years with four types of lingual retainers: (1) 0.016 × 0.022-inch dead-soft wire, (2) 0.0215-inch five-strand SS wire, (3) 0.014 × 0.014-inch CAD/CAM nitinol wire, and (4) CBPs. The irregularity index, intercanine distances, and arch lengths were obtained and used to evaluate mandibular stability. Failure rates were also assessed during this study. Data were statistically analysed. RESULTS: Irregularity increased, whereas intercanine width and arch length decreased after 3 years of retention. The greatest irregularity was associated with the CBPs and the least with the CAD/CAM retainers. Changes in stability measurements were significantly higher in the dead-soft wire and CBPs than those in the CAD/CAM nitinol and multistrand SS wires. Parallel to these changes, the frequency of failure yielded similar results with the same significance between the groups. The failure rate of CBPs, in contrast to the CAD/CAM nitinol and multistrand SS wires, was significantly higher in the right quadrant (P < .05). CONCLUSION: After taking the 3-year results into consideration, CAD/CAM nitinol and multistrand SS wires were found to be more successful than the others in maintaining mandibular stability. The most failures were observed with CBPs after 3 years of retention.