Scholarlink

Aims <p>To quantify and compare the three-dimensional (3D) deviations of crown and root movements produced by two clear aligner systems based on different materials—SmartTrack (ST) and MasterControl S (MCS)—in first premolar extraction cases using a 3D crown–root registration approach.</p> Methods <p>This retrospective cohort study included 29 patients (58 dental sides) treated with ST (n = 15) or MCS (n = 14). Pretreatment (T0) CBCT images were integrated with T0 and post-treatment (T1) intraoral scans and superimposed using palatal rugae as reference structures. Linear mixed-effects models (LMM) were applied to estimate between-material differences while adjusting for age, sex, and standardized planned movement magnitude. Estimates are reported with 95% confidence intervals (CI).</p> Results <p>The two systems demonstrated no statistically significant difference in deviation in sagittal crown retraction of the maxillary central incisor (U1) (ST: 1.25 (1.30) mm; MCS: 2.13 (1.82) mm; LMM difference: −&#xa0; 0.81&#xa0;mm; 95% CI  −&#xa0;1.89–0.28; P = 0.145). MCS demonstrated smaller deviation in sagittal root positioning for the second premolar (U5) (difference: 1.07&#xa0;mm; 95% CI 0.21–1.93; P = 0.015) and first molar (U6) (difference: 1.04&#xa0;mm; 95% CI 0.13–1.94; P = 0.025). ST showed improved control of U5 axial inclination (difference: 3.33°; 95% CI 0.27–6.39; P = 0.033) and torque (difference: 3.04°; 95% CI 0.08 to 6.00; P = 0.044). Both systems exhibited a consistent “roller-coaster effect”, with no significant difference in unplanned U1 extrusion (difference: 0.14&#xa0;mm; 95% CI  −&#xa0;0.73–1.02; P = 0.747).</p> Conclusions <p>The biomechanical performance of clear aligner systems appears to vary depending on tooth position and movement vector. SmartTrack demonstrated better control of premolar angulation and torque, whereas MasterControl S showed closer agreement with the planned sagittal root position.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Three-dimensional crown–root movement in first premolar extraction cases treated with two clear aligner systems based on different materials: a retrospective cohort study

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年5月26日

查看全文
  • Luyao Qu,
  • Runzhe Fang,
  • Ruomei Li,
  • Zitong Yang,
  • Yixin Li,
  • Xuehui Chen,
  • Boxi Chen,
  • Jian Wang,
  • Lingjun Yuan,
  • Lunguo Xia,
  • Bing Fang

摘要

Aims

To quantify and compare the three-dimensional (3D) deviations of crown and root movements produced by two clear aligner systems based on different materials—SmartTrack (ST) and MasterControl S (MCS)—in first premolar extraction cases using a 3D crown–root registration approach.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study included 29 patients (58 dental sides) treated with ST (n = 15) or MCS (n = 14). Pretreatment (T0) CBCT images were integrated with T0 and post-treatment (T1) intraoral scans and superimposed using palatal rugae as reference structures. Linear mixed-effects models (LMM) were applied to estimate between-material differences while adjusting for age, sex, and standardized planned movement magnitude. Estimates are reported with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

Results

The two systems demonstrated no statistically significant difference in deviation in sagittal crown retraction of the maxillary central incisor (U1) (ST: 1.25 (1.30) mm; MCS: 2.13 (1.82) mm; LMM difference: −  0.81 mm; 95% CI  − 1.89–0.28; P = 0.145). MCS demonstrated smaller deviation in sagittal root positioning for the second premolar (U5) (difference: 1.07 mm; 95% CI 0.21–1.93; P = 0.015) and first molar (U6) (difference: 1.04 mm; 95% CI 0.13–1.94; P = 0.025). ST showed improved control of U5 axial inclination (difference: 3.33°; 95% CI 0.27–6.39; P = 0.033) and torque (difference: 3.04°; 95% CI 0.08 to 6.00; P = 0.044). Both systems exhibited a consistent “roller-coaster effect”, with no significant difference in unplanned U1 extrusion (difference: 0.14 mm; 95% CI  − 0.73–1.02; P = 0.747).

Conclusions

The biomechanical performance of clear aligner systems appears to vary depending on tooth position and movement vector. SmartTrack demonstrated better control of premolar angulation and torque, whereas MasterControl S showed closer agreement with the planned sagittal root position.