Short term dentoskeletal effects of mandibular advancement clear aligners in Class II growing patients. A prospective controlled study according to STROBE Guidelines

Authors

  • S Ravera Post-Graduate School of Orthodontics, Lingotto – Dental School, Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Turin, Turin
  • T Castroflorio Post-Graduate School of Orthodontics, Lingotto – Dental School, Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Turin, Turin
  • F Galati Post-Graduate School of Orthodontics, Lingotto – Dental School, Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Turin, Turin
  • G Cugliari Genomic Variation in Human Population and Complex Diseases Unit, Department of Medical Sciences, University of Turin, Turin
  • F Garino Private Practice, Turin
  • A Deregibus Post-Graduate School of Orthodontics, Lingotto – Dental School, Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Turin, Turin
  • V Quinzi Department of Life, Health and Environmental Sciences, University of l'Aquila, L'Aquila

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.23804/ejpd.2021.22.02.6

Keywords:

Class II malocclusion, Clear aligners, Growing subjects: Mandibular advancement

Abstract

AIM: To evaluate the dentoskeletal effects of the Invisalign® Mandibular Advancement (MA) (Align Technology, San José, CA, USA) feature in skeletal Class II growing patients with mandibular retrusion, at pre-pubertal and pubertal stages. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Study design: Forty skeletal Class II patients were prospectively recruited and treated with Invisalign® MA. They were divided into two subgroups according to the CVM stage of growth (CVM2 and CVM3) at the beginning of treatment (T0). For each patient, lateral radiographs were collected at the beginning (T0) and at the end of the mandibular advancement treatment (T1) and their measurements were compared with those obtained by an untreated control group of 32 subjects, matched for growth stage and malocclusion. CONCLUSION: The use of Invisalign® MA is effective in treating Class II growing patient with retrognathic mandible in the short term period. While treatment at prepubertal stage of growth results in dentoalveolar rather than skeletal effects, treatment during the pubertal spurt produces skeletal effects with an annual rate of change of 5.8 mm.

Similar Articles

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.