RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of the current systematic review was to answer the clinical research question "Is Clear Aligner Therapy (CAT) effective in controlling the orthodontic movement?" by bringing together the most up-to-date information about the available evidence for CAT. METHODOLOGY: On January 1, 2023, a search was conducted in PubMed, ERIC, Embase, and CINHAL for any research papers published in the previous 10 years that provided an overview of the PICO questions. Both the titles and abstracts of the selected studies were evaluated independently by two different authors, and if there was any disagreement between the two review authors, a third reviewer was brought in to settle it. RESULTS: Among included studies, three were retrospective non-randomized and two studies were prospective randomized clinical trials. Various authors reported better outcome for fixed orthodontic appliances than for clear aligner treatment (CAT) in relation to mandibular incisor proclination. The mean objective grading system score was better for braces (17) than for CAT (12) with no clinically significant difference, while staging had a significant impact on treatment efficacy. CONCLUSION: The results of this study suggest that clear aligners may be an effective alternative to traditional braces, but more research is needed to confirm these findings and determine the optimal size of future prospective studies evaluating this treatment.
RESUMO
Objective: The current cross-sectional study aimed to assess the relationship between impacted maxillary canines and their effect on root resorption of neighboring teeth using cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT). Materials and Methods: The study evaluated the effect of 24 impacted maxillary canines on the adjacent tooth roots. We used a CBCT to evaluate the position and size of the dental follicle of impacted maxillary canines and the severity of root resorption on adjacent teeth. We used a t-test to compare the significant differences between the width of the dental follicle and the severity of root resorption. The inter- and intra-rater agreements were assessed. Results: A number of 12 impacted canines had resorbed the roots of adjacent teeth. Lateral incisors were most affected (83.3%), followed by central incisors (16.7%). Mild root resorption was found in 10 cases, while severe resorption was found in two cases. We found no relation between the size of the dental follicle and the degree of root resorption. The inter- and intra-rater agreements were high. Conclusion: In cases with maxillary impacted canines, special consideration should be directed to the roots of the maxillary lateral incisors. Our findings could not confirm any relationship between the size of the dental follicle width of the maxillary impacted canines and the degree of root resorption of the adjacent incisors. More studies are needed to assess the proximity and path of eruption of impacted maxillary canines and their effect on the neighboring teeth.