Universidade de São Paulo, Faculdade de Odontologia, Departamento de Ortodontia (São Paulo/SP, Brazil).
Universidade Estadual do Rio de Janeiro, Faculdade de Odontologia, Departamento de Ortodontia (Rio de Janeiro/RJ Brazil).
Dental Press J Orthod. 2024 May 20;29(2):e2423237. doi: 10.1590/2177-6709.29.2.e2423237.oar. eCollection 2024.
This retrospective study aimed to assess the predictability of Invisalign® aligners regarding rotational, mesio-distal and buccal-lingual tip movements.
Two materials were included in the analysis - EX30, used until 2013; and SmartTrack, in current use. The study comprised 56 adult patients treated with Invisalign Comprehensive. Data sample were assessed on three sets of digital models; model 1 - initial, model 2 - predicted, and model 3 - achieved. Sixty reference points were marked in each dental arch, and two reference planes assisted the superimposition. The degree of rotation, mesio-distal and buccal-lingual tip was obtained via trigonometric calculations, through a previously published validated method. The accuracy of outcomes was compared according to the types of tooth movement and teeth groups,and the influence of predetermined variables on movement accuracy was also investigated.
Rotation and mesio-distal tip did not present any significant difference when comparing EX30 and SmartTrack groups. Only buccal-lingual tip presented a significant difference, incisor and canine groups treated with EX30 aligners presented an increase in accuracy (p= 0.007 and p = 0.007, respectively). For each additional degree planned for rotation movements, there was an increase of 0.35° in the discrepancy, and an increase of 0.40° and 0.41° for mesio-distal and buccal-lingual tip, respectively. EX30 and SmartTrack discrepancies were compared by multilevel linear regression.
EX30 aligners reached higher accuracy for buccal-lingual tip in anterior teeth. However, for rotation and mesio-distal tip, SmartTrack and EX30 are similarly accurate. The total amount of planned movement has a significant impact on accuracy rates, with a decrease in accuracy for every additional degree.
本回顾性研究旨在评估 Invisalign® 矫正器在牙齿旋转、近远中向和颊舌向倾斜移动方面的预测能力。
分析中包含两种材料——EX30（2013 年前使用）和 SmartTrack（当前使用）。该研究纳入了 56 名接受 Invisalign Comprehensive 治疗的成年患者。数据样本评估了三组数字模型：模型 1-初始，模型 2-预测，模型 3-实际。在每个牙弓中标记了 60 个参考点，两个参考平面辅助重叠。通过先前发表的验证方法，通过三角计算获得牙齿的旋转、近远中向和颊舌向倾斜程度。根据牙齿移动类型和牙齿组比较结果的准确性，并研究预定变量对移动准确性的影响。
在比较 EX30 和 SmartTrack 组时，旋转和近远中向倾斜没有差异。只有颊舌向倾斜有显著差异，EX30 矫正器治疗的切牙和尖牙组准确性增加（p=0.007 和 p=0.007）。对于每个计划增加的旋转运动度数，差异增加 0.35°，近远中向和颊舌向倾斜分别增加 0.40°和 0.41°。通过多层次线性回归比较了 EX30 和 SmartTrack 的差异。
EX30 矫正器在前牙的颊舌向倾斜方面达到了更高的准确性。然而，对于旋转和近远中向倾斜，SmartTrack 和 EX30 的准确性相似。计划运动的总量对准确性有显著影响，每增加一度准确性就会降低。
