Malpartida-Pacheco Mónica Ivette, Dulanto-Vargas Julissa Amparo
División de Ortodoncia, Universidad Científica del Sur. Lima, Perú.
Research Group in Dental Sciences, Carrera de Estomatología, Universidad Científica del Sur. Lima, Perú.
Rev Cient Odontol (Lima). 2023 Jun 29;11(2):e154. doi: 10.21142/2523-2754-1102-2023-154. eCollection 2023 Apr-Jun.
The aligners have become a preferred alternative in terms of orthodontic treatment, surpassing the choice of conventional brackets, due to the comfort and aesthetics that the aligners represent, however, the final result with this system continues to be a controversial issue. The objective of this review was to verify the effectiveness of the treatment completed with aligners versus conventional brackets.
An exhaustive search was carried out in the PubMed, ScienceDirect, Scopus and Embase databases up to the date of January 5, 2023, including comparative studies that evaluated the final result and treatment time of the aligners compared to conventional braces. Two researchers carefully selected the articles evaluated and analyzed different key topics on the subject.
In this study, 8 articles were included, according to the studies, the vast majority did not find significant differences in completion between the compared groups. In addition to this, the treatment time in 3 articles was faster with aligners, in 3 articles it was faster with conventional brackets, and in one article no significant difference was found, so it is not yet established whether a system is faster than the other.
Both aligners and conventional fixed orthodontics had good results at the end of orthodontic treatment and presented a similar treatment time, however, the majority of treated cases belonged to malocclusions of medium to low complexity, so these cannot be generalized. findings to all malocclusions.
由于隐形矫治器具有舒适性和美观性，已成为正畸治疗中比传统托槽更受青睐的选择，然而，该系统的最终治疗效果仍是一个有争议的问题。本综述的目的是验证使用隐形矫治器与传统托槽完成治疗的有效性。
截至2023年1月5日，在PubMed、ScienceDirect、Scopus和Embase数据库中进行了详尽的检索，纳入了比较隐形矫治器与传统矫治器最终治疗效果和治疗时间的对比研究。两名研究人员仔细筛选了评估的文章，并分析了该主题的不同关键要点。
本研究纳入了8篇文章，根据研究，绝大多数研究未发现比较组之间在治疗完成情况上有显著差异。除此之外，3篇文章显示隐形矫治器的治疗时间更快，3篇文章显示传统托槽的治疗时间更快，1篇文章未发现显著差异，因此尚未确定哪种系统治疗时间更快。
在正畸治疗结束时，隐形矫治器和传统固定正畸治疗均取得了良好的效果，且治疗时间相似，然而，大多数治疗病例属于中低复杂性错牙合畸形，因此这些结果不能推广至所有错牙合畸形。
