Conventional and self-ligating lingual orthodontic treatment outcomes in Class I nonextraction patients: A comparative study with the American Board of Orthodontics Objective Grading System

Sezici, Yağmur Lena; Önçağ, Mehmet Gökhan

doi:10.1016/j.ajodo.2022.10.021

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The results revealed that labial treatment resulted in nearly twice the amount of anchorage loss compared to lingual treatment [10,18]. Researchers looked into the future and found that Forestadent 2D therapy, which involves moving the lower dental arch's labial and lingual parts, mostly has the same effect on people with Class I crowding [22]. A study that looked back at the past found that using lingual [STb] and labial appliances leads to similar decreases in PAR, treatment times, and root resorption levels [19].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evidence of Effectiveness of Lingual Orthodontics as an Alternative to Conventional Labial Orthodontics. A Systematic Review

Ahmed,

Alghabban,

Alqahtani

et al. 2024

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In orthodontics, both the treatment goals and the impact of orthodontic equipment on patients' aesthetic appearance have contributed to a rise in patients' aesthetic demands over the years. Patients considering orthodontic treatment are significantly concerned about the potential compromise in facial appearance that conventional orthodontic therapy might cause. Clinical practice has integrated aesthetic materials and procedures to address these restrictions. This review will examine the present data and outcomes linked to lingual orthodontics. PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Embase were the electronic databases searched. Research interests mainly included biomechanics, appliance design, bonding, laboratory settings, case reports, survey research, and treatment outcomes. The goal was to locate the most recent data regarding lingual orthodontics. A consistent and predictable pattern emerges from the available evidence on lingual orthodontics. Several areas have received a lot of attention over the past decade, including the ability to forecast outcomes and patients' preparedness to embrace these changes. The current state of knowledge on the biomechanical principles of lingual orthodontics is solid, as this review shows. Lingual orthodontic appliances can efficiently handle any orthodontic scenario that a labial appliance can handle. The reason is that the completely customized lingual appliance might bring about the desired result in terms of treatment.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evidence of Effectiveness of Lingual Orthodontics as an Alternative to Conventional Labial Orthodontics. A Systematic Review

Ahmed,

Alghabban,

Alqahtani

et al. 2024

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Quantitative light-induced fluorescence enables effective detection of orthodontic adhesive residues in diverse environments

Mangal

Kim

et al. 2023

Photodiagnosis and Photodynamic Therapy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Comparison of Upper Central Incisor Torque in the ClinCheck® with and without CBCT Integration: A Cross-Sectional Study

Queirós,

Gonçalves,

Ferreira

et al. 2024

Dentistry Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Controlling root movement is one of the greatest challenges in orthodontic treatment with aligners, like Invisalign® aligners. Cone Beam Computed Tomography (CBCT) integration into ClinCheck®, enabling bone and root visualisation, allows a more accurate follow-up of the teeth position. This study aims to compare torque measurements of the upper central incisors with and without CBCT and relate them to the upper incisor inclination and facial biotype. In a sample of 70 teeth, torque measurements were obtained by importing images into AutoCAD® software (version 2024). The angle between the tooth’s long axis with CBCT duplicate and the tooth’s long axis without CBCT was obtained to assess the difference. Statistically significant differences between torque measurements with and without CBCT were found, as well as between these measurements and the inclination of the upper incisors. No statistically significant differences were found among the facial biotypes. The average values of 27.8° ± 3.4° and 21.5° ± 3.2° were obtained for the angle between the axes. Torque without CBCT was lower than torque with CBCT, for the same tooth. The angle between the axes had a similar mean for both teeth. CBCT integration into ClinCheck® allows for a more correct torque measurement.

show abstract

Conventional and self-ligating lingual orthodontic treatment outcomes in Class I nonextraction patients: A comparative study with the American Board of Orthodontics Objective Grading System

Cited by 3 publications

References 32 publications

Evidence of Effectiveness of Lingual Orthodontics as an Alternative to Conventional Labial Orthodontics. A Systematic Review

Evidence of Effectiveness of Lingual Orthodontics as an Alternative to Conventional Labial Orthodontics. A Systematic Review

Quantitative light-induced fluorescence enables effective detection of orthodontic adhesive residues in diverse environments

Comparison of Upper Central Incisor Torque in the ClinCheck® with and without CBCT Integration: A Cross-Sectional Study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About