AIM: The aim of this study was to evaluate the changes in the transverse dimension and the perimeter of the maxillary arch produced by low friction self-ligating brackets TIME 3 compared to the Invisalign technique. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Both the self-ligating sample and the Invisalign group were composed of 20 subjects, evaluated at the beginning (T0) and at the completion of therapy (T1). All subjects presented a Class I malocclusion with mild crowding in a permanent dentition, without craniofacial anomalies, missing teeth or a history of orthodontic treatment. Dento-alveolar measurements were made on the maxillary dental casts at T0 and T1. Significant differences between the treated groups were assessed with Independent Samples t test (p<0.05). RESULTS: Statistically significant differences between self-ligating sample and Invisalign group were recorded for CWC, FPWF, FPWL, SPWF, SPWL, and AP measurements. No significant changes were found for CWL, MWF, MWL, and AD values. There was not a statistically significant difference between the treatment durations of the groups: 1.8 years for both patients. These data suggest that Invisalign treatment cannot be somewhat faster than fixed appliances. Moreover the final occlusion might not be as ideal. CONCLUSIONS: The low fiction self-ligating system produced statistically significant different outcomes in the transverse dento-alveolar width and the perimeter of the maxillary arch during treatment when compared to Invisalign tecnique.
AIM: The aim of this study was to evaluate the changes in the transverse dimension and the perimeter of the maxillary arch produced by low friction self-ligating brackets TIME 3 compared to the Invisalign technique. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Both the self-ligating sample and the Invisalign group were composed of 20 subjects, evaluated at the beginning (T0) and at the completion of therapy (T1). All subjects presented a Class I malocclusion with mild crowding in a permanent dentition, without craniofacial anomalies, missing teeth or a history of orthodontic treatment. Dento-alveolar measurements were made on the maxillary dental casts at T0 and T1. Significant differences between the treated groups were assessed with Independent Samples t test (p<0.05). RESULTS: Statistically significant differences between self-ligating sample and Invisalign group were recorded for CWC, FPWF, FPWL, SPWF, SPWL, and AP measurements. No significant changes were found for CWL, MWF, MWL, and AD values. There was not a statistically significant difference between the treatment durations of the groups: 1.8 years for both patients. These data suggest that Invisalign treatment cannot be somewhat faster than fixed appliances. Moreover the final occlusion might not be as ideal. CONCLUSIONS: The low fiction self-ligating system produced statistically significant different outcomes in the transverse dento-alveolar width and the perimeter of the maxillary arch during treatment when compared to Invisalign tecnique.
Authors: Kevin B Miller; Susan P McGorray; Randy Womack; Juan Carlos Quintero; Mark Perelmuter; Jerome Gibson; Teresa A Dolan; Timothy T Wheeler Journal: Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop Date: 2007-03 Impact factor: 2.650
Authors: Alissa F Borda; Judah S Garfinkle; David A Covell; Mansen Wang; Larry Doyle; Christine M Sedgley Journal: Angle Orthod Date: 2020-07-01 Impact factor: 2.079
Authors: Amalia Cong; Antonio Carlos de Oliveira Ruellas; Sandra Khong Tai; Charlene Tai Loh; Mary Barkley; Marilia Yatabe; Marco Caminiti; Camila Massaro; Jonas Bianchi; Romain Deleat-Besson; Celia Le; Juan Carlos Prieto; Najla N Al Turkestani; Lucia Cevidanes Journal: Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop Date: 2022-10 Impact factor: 2.711