The increasing demand for more aesthetic/comfortable orthodontic alternatives fostered the utilization of clear aligners in recent years. However, the efficacy of clear aligners for treating complex malocclusions is often treated with scepticism. This case series aims to evaluate the predictability of the Invisalign® First system in moderate and severe cases requiring interceptive orthodontic treatments in mixed dentition. A total of 23 patients with 102 interceptive orthodontic malocclusion traits were selected for orthodontic treatment with Invisalign® First and were examined over 18 months (Phase 1). Clinical assessments included ClinCheck® predictions, cephalometric measurements, and measuring tools commonly used to quantify tooth movement. Measurements taken at the beginning and end of the treatment were compared. The complexity degree of each case was established based on the set of problems presented by each patient. All treatment objectives were achieved within 18 months, except for two Class II cases, with 69% of them solved with the first set of aligners. Additional aligners were used in the remaining cases. Even though these 23 cases suggest that the Invisalign® First (Phase 1) may be effective in most interceptive problems, controlled randomized clinical trials are required to evaluate movement predictability and how this relates to the problem complexity and additional aligners required.

Background: Clear aligners (CA) are used 22 h daily, creating a bite-block effect. This work aims to (i) analyze occlusal changes before the beginning of treatment, after the first set of CA and after the use of additional aligners; (ii) compare planned occlusal contacts with the ones obtained after the first set of CA; (iii) analyze the occlusal changes occurred after reaching the orthodontic goals after 3 months of using CA only at night; (iv) evaluate and characterize which tooth movements did not allow the treatment to be completed at the end of the first set of aligners, and finally (v) verify the possible relation between the changes in occlusal contact and areas and parameters such as case complexity and facial biotype. Materials and Methods: A quantitative, comparative, and observational longitudinal cohort study design was implemented to evaluate the clinical data and the complexity levels of cases receiving CA. A non-probabilistic and convenience sample of 82 individuals was recruited. The orthodontic malocclusion traits were classified as simple, moderate, or complex corrections based on the basis of the Align® recommendations with the Invisalign® evaluation tool. According to the Invisalign® criteria, patients need only one complex problem for their case to be classified as complex. Meshlab® v. 2022.02, ClinCheck®version Pro 6.0, My-Itero®version 2.7.9.601 5d plus, and IBM® SPSS Statistics software (Statistical Program for Social Sciences), version 27.0 for Windows were the software ® used. Results: A statistically significant decrease in area and occlusal contacts number were observed from before the start of orthodontic treatment (T0) to the end of treatment (T1). The changes in the occlusal area (from T0 to T1) were statistically different between hyperdivergent (28.24 [15.51–40.91]) and hypodivergent (16.23 [8.11–24.97]) biotypes (p = 0.031). A significant difference between the hyperdivergent (4.0 [2.0–5.0]) and normodivergent (5.5 [4.0–8.0]) group was found in T1 for the anterior contacts (p = 0.044). Anterior contacts obtained were significantly higher than the planned (p = 0.037) Between T1 and T2 statistically significant increases of occlusal areas, posterior and total contacts were observed. Conclusions: Occlusal contact and area were decreased, either at the end of the first set or after the use of additional aligners. Anterior occlusal contacts obtained were higher than planned as opposed to posterior occlusal contacts obtained. The hardest tooth movements to achieve to complete the treatment were distalization, rotation, and posterior extrusion. After completing orthodontic treatment (T1) to 3 months after (T2) using additional aligners only at night, posterior occlusal contacts were significantly increased, which could be due to the natural settling of the teeth in this period.

Introduction. There is a growing demand for more aesthetic, comfortable, and faster orthodontic treatments, and clear aligners emerged as a solution to fulfill this need. However, the effectiveness of clear aligners to treat complex malocclusions is yet contentious. The use of acceleration methods could improve the efficacy of clear aligners by stimulating cells' mechanobiology through numerous pathways, but this hypothesis is still poorly explored. Objective. We aimed to monitor the release profile of an inflammatory marker-the interleukin-1β-and to evaluate its relationship with self-reported pain scores with and without the use of acceleration techniques during an orthodontic treatment requiring difficult tooth movements with clear aligners. Case Report. Here, we report a case of a 46-year-old female patient who presented functional and aesthetic complaints. Intraoral examination revealed a diminished overjet and overbite, rotation of teeth 45 and 24, absence of teeth 25, 35, and 36, buccolingual dislocation of tooth 21, a tendency to a Class III malocclusion, and a 2 mm left deviation of the lower midline. This study is divided into three stimulation phases: no stimulation, mechanical vibration stimulation, and photobiomodulation. Interleukin-1β levels in gingival crevicular fluid samples from the pressure side of six selected teeth were evaluated at four time points after the orthodontic treatment onset. Pain monitoring in those teeth was performed using a visual analogue scale at the same time points. Results. Interleukin-1β protein production peaked 24 h after treatment onset. Complex movements were associated with increased self-reported pain. Conclusion. Clear aligners show limitations in solving complex tooth movements, even when combined with acceleration. The development of customized and programmable stimulation microdevices integrated into “smart aligners,” which could be designed to specifically stimulate the direction of movement and stimulation parameters and could constitute a solution to optimize the orthodontic tooth movement with clear aligners.

Scissor bite (SB.) is a rare malocclusion that is challenging to diagnose and is often associated with a retrognathic mandible and a series of functional and structural abnormalities that negatively affect the patient. This article intends to analyze the treatment approaches applied to growing patients younger than 16 years old, comparing the conventional appliances described in the literature and a clinical case treated with clear aligners with mandibular advancement (MA.). SB is primarily related to skeletal Class I and II, according to Angle classification. In the various cases analyzed, it can also be mentioned as a significant number of cases with SB of dental origin (seven of dental and four of skeletal) in young patients. In children and adolescents who still have growth potential, the therapeutic possibilities are numerous. A comprehensive literature search was manually performed from 2002 until January 2023, in PubMed and BVS databases with the following conjugated keywords: “scissor bite OR brodie bite” AND “malocclusion” AND “treatment OR correction OR therapeutics”. The present case report on a young patient demonstrated the efficiency of the clear aligners with MA to correct an SB, associated with several functional and structural anomalies such as Class II division 1 with an increased overjet and overbite as well as a severe curve of Spee in a hypodivergent biotype.