Home > Journals > Minerva Stomatologica > Past Issues > Minerva Stomatologica 2020 December;69(6) > Minerva Stomatologica 2020 December;69(6):329-34

CURRENT ISSUE
 

JOURNAL TOOLS

eTOC
To subscribe
Submit an article
Recommend to your librarian
 

ARTICLE TOOLS

Publication history
Reprints
Permissions
Cite this article as

 

ORIGINAL ARTICLE   

Minerva Stomatologica 2020 December;69(6):329-34

DOI: 10.23736/S0026-4970.20.04128-X

Copyright © 2020 EDIZIONI MINERVA MEDICA

language: English

Invisalign appliance: aesthetic and efficiency

Alessandra LUCCHESE 1, 2 , Riccardo NOCINI 3, Umberto TACCHINO 1, 2, Luis H. GHISLANZONI 1, 2, Dario BERTOSSI 4, Giulia RICCIARDI 4, Luca BASSANI 1, 2, Sofija KOROLIJA 1, 2, Antonino LO GIUDICE 5, Silvia CROCE 1, 2, Maurizio MANUELLI 1, 2, 6

1 Department of Dentistry, Dental School, IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy; 2 Research Center for Oral Pathology and Implantology, IRCCS San Raffaele Hospital, Vita-Salute San Raffaele University, Milan, Italy; 3 Unit of ENT, Department of Surgical Sciences, Dentistry, Gynecology and Pediatrics, University of Verona, Verona, Italy; 4 Unit of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Department of Surgical Sciences, Dentistry, Gynecology and Pediatrics, University of Verona, Verona, Italy; 5 Section of Orthodontics, Department of General Surgery and Medical Surgical Specialities, School of Dentistry, University of Catania, Catania, Italy; 6 Private Practitioner, Milan, Pavia, Bologna, Italy



BACKGROUND: The patients’ request for treatment with clear aligners is constantly increasing. The aligners permit to the clinicians a valid way to solve a lot of orthodontic cases but the patients’ compliance and the clinicians’ capabilities and knowledge of the technique is fundamental for the outcome.
METHODS: Seventy-two digital models of 18 consecutive patients treated with Invisalign and Smart Track aligners for 14 weeks were analyzed. The operator positioned 24 points on each model and were obtained the values of arch depth and perimeter of arch before and after the treatment. The variations of measurement were calculated with t student test.
RESULTS: A decrease of arch depth and perimeter was found from t0 to t1 and the most relevant difference was observed in the upper arch depth with a decrease of 1.3 mm and in the upper arch perimeter with a difference of 1.1 mm.
CONCLUSIONS: There was always a decrease of the values of arch depth and arch perimeter at the end of the treatment, especially in the upper arch. These changes must be considered by the clinicians to perform a better treatment to obtain the most predictable results and a patient’s higher satisfaction.


KEY WORDS: Orthodontics; Orthodontic appliances, removable; Dental arch; Esthetics

top of page