The korean journal of orthodontics (대한치과교정학회지)

The Korean Association Of Orthodontists (대한치과교정학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Clinical expression of programmed maxillary buccal expansion and buccolingual crown inclination with Invisalign EX30 and SmartTrack aligners and the effect of 1-week vs. 2-week aligner change regimes: A retrospective cohort study

  • Joseph O'Connor (Private Practice) ;
  • Tony Weir (Department of Orthodontics, The University of Queensland) ;
  • Elissa Freer (Department of Orthodontics, The University of Queensland) ;
  • Brett Kerr (Department of Orthodontics, The University of Queensland)
  • Received : 2023.02.14
  • Accepted : 2023.11.14
  • Published : 2024.05.25
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective: This retrospective cohort study aimed to assess and compare the accuracy of 3 different Invisalign® treatment regimens in terms of variations of aligner change frequency and type of aligner material in achieving maxillary dental buccal expansion. Methods: Altogether, 120 adult patients whose treatment involved maxillary dental expansion with Invisalign® were included. The patients were divided into 3 groups, with each group comprising 40 patients as follows: SmartTrack® 1-week changes (ST1), SmartTrack® 2-week changes (ST2), and EX30® 2-week changes (EX2). The groups were assessed by comparing actual changes achieved with those prescribed by ClinCheck®. The rates of clinically significant inaccuracies (CSI) observed for buccal expansion (≥ 0.5 mm) and buccolingual inclination (≥ 2°) during expansion were then determined. Results: In terms of expansion, the ST1 group demonstrated the highest CSI rate at all tooth levels, whereas the ST2 group had the lowest rate of CSI and the lowest mean inaccuracy for each tooth level. In terms of buccolingual inclination, the ST1 group had the highest CSI rate across all tooth levels, whereas the EX2 group had the lowest CSI rate at all tooth levels except for the canine level where the ST2 group had the lowest CSI rate. A tendency toward overexpression of buccal crown inclination, and underexpression of buccal expansion was observed at all tooth levels. Conclusions: Two-week aligner change regimens offer improved accuracy compared with 1-week aligner changes. SmartTrack® 2-week changes were the most accurate for buccal expansion, whereas EX30® 2-week changes were the most accurate for buccolingual inclination.

Keywords

References

  1. Martin AJ, Buschang PH, Boley JC, Taylor RW, McKinney TW. The impact of buccal corridors on smile attractiveness. Eur J Orthod 2007;29:530-7. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjm063
  2. Parekh S, Fields HW, Beck FM, Rosenstiel SF. The acceptability of variations in smile arc and buccal corridor space. Orthod Craniofac Res 2007;10:15-21. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1601-6343.2007.00378.x
  3. Thilander B, Wahlund S, Lennartsson B. The effect of early interceptive treatment in children with posterior cross-bite. Eur J Orthod 1984;6:25-34. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/6.1.25
  4. Papageorgiou SN, Sifakakis I, Keilig L, Patcas R, Affolter S, Eliades T, et al. Torque differences according to tooth morphology and bracket placement: a finite element study. Eur J Orthod 2017;39:411-8. https://doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjw074
  5. Andrews LF. The six keys to normal occlusion. Am J Orthod 1972;62:296-309. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0002-9416(72)90268-0
  6. Zhou N, Guo J. Efficiency of upper arch expansion with the Invisalign system. Angle Orthod 2020;90:23-30. https://doi.org/10.2319/022719-151.1
  7. Papadimitriou A, Mousoulea S, Gkantidis N, Kloukos D. Clinical effectiveness of Invisalign® orthodontic treatment: a systematic review. Prog Orthod 2018;19:37. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40510-018-0235-z
  8. Align Technology Media. Align technology receives U.S. patents for Smarttrack® Invisalign® aligner material [Internet]. Tempe: Align Technology, Inc.; 2017 May 24 [cited 2020 Jun 1]. Available from: http://investor.aligntech.com/news-releases/news-release-details/align-technology-receives-us-patents-smarttrackr-invisalignr
  9. Condo' R, Pazzini L, Cerroni L, Pasquantonio G, Lagana' G, Pecora A, et al. Mechanical properties of "two generations" of teeth aligners: change analysis during oral permanence. Dent Mater J 2018;37:835-42. https://doi.org/10.4012/dmj.2017-323
  10. Bollen AM, Huang G, King G, Hujoel P, Ma T. Activation time and material stiffness of sequential removable orthodontic appliances. Part 1: ability to complete treatment. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2003;124:496-501. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0889-5406(03)00576-6
  11. Clements KM, Bollen AM, Huang G, King G, Hujoel P, Ma T. Activation time and material stiffness of sequential removable orthodontic appliances. Part 2: dental improvements. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2003;124:502-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0889-5406(03)00577-8
  12. 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 Dentofacial Orthop 2008;133:837-45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.06.025
  13. Al-Nadawi M, Kravitz ND, Hansa I, Makki L, Ferguson DJ, Vaid NR. Effect of clear aligner wear protocol on the efficacy of tooth movement. Angle Orthod 2021;91:157-63. https://doi.org/10.2319/071520-630.1
  14. Stephens C, Weir T, Llewellyn S, Freer E, Kerr B. Clinical expression of programmed mandibular canine rotation using various attachment protocols and 1- vs 2-week wear protocols with Invisalign SmartTrack aligners: a retrospective cohort study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2022;162:e103-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2022.06.015
  15. Blundell HL Dr, Weir T Dr, Kerr B Dr, Freer E Dr. Predictability of overbite control with the Invisalign appliance. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2021;160:725-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2020.06.042
  16. Weir T, Shailendran A, Kerr B, Freer E. Quantitative assessment of interproximal tooth reduction performed as part of Invisalign® treatment in 10 orthodontic practices. Aust Orthod J 2021;37:176-86. https://doi.org/10.21307/aoj-2021.019
  17. Weir T, Shailendran A, Freer E. Prevalence of interproximal tooth reduction prescribed as part of initial Invisalign® treatment in 10 orthodontic practices. Aust Orthod J 2022;38:96-101. https://sciendo.com/fr/article/10.21307/aoj-2022.009
  18. Solano-Mendoza B, Sonnemberg B, Solano-Reina E, Iglesias-Linares A. How effective is the Invisalign® system in expansion movement with Ex30' aligners? Clin Oral Investig 2017;21:1475-84. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00784-016-1908-y
  19. Grunheid T, Loh C, Larson BE. How accurate is Invisalign in nonextraction cases? Are predicted tooth positions achieved? Angle Orthod 2017;87:809-15. https://doi.org/10.2319/022717-147.1
  20. Houle JP, Piedade L, Todescan R Jr, Pinheiro FH. The predictability of transverse changes with Invisalign. Angle Orthod 2017;87:19-24. https://doi.org/10.2319/122115-875.1
  21. Lione R, Paoloni V, Bartolommei L, Gazzani F, Meuli S, Pavoni C, et al. Maxillary arch development with Invisalign system. Angle Orthod 2021;91:433-40. https://doi.org/10.2319/080520-687.1
  22. Brascher AK, Zuran D, Feldmann RE Jr, Benrath J. Patient survey on Invisalign® treatment comparing [corrected] the SmartTrack® material to the previously used [corrected] aligner material. J Orofac Orthop 2016;77:432-8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00056-016-0051-3 Erratum in: J Orofac Orthop 2017;78:511. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00056-016-0081-x
  23. Robertson L, Kaur H, Fagundes NCF, Romanyk D, Major P, Flores Mir C. Effectiveness of clear aligner therapy for orthodontic treatment: a systematic review. Orthod Craniofac Res 2020;23:133-42. https://doi.org/10.1111/ocr.12353
  24. Galan-Lopez L, Barcia-Gonzalez J, Plasencia E. A systematic review of the accuracy and efficiency of dental movements with Invisalign®. Korean J Orthod 2019;49:140-9. https://doi.org/10.4041/kjod.2019.49.3.140