Objective: : To assess the scientific evidence related to the efficacy of clear aligner treatment (CAT) in controlling orthodontic tooth movement. Materials and Methods: : PubMed, PMC, NLM, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Clinical Trials, Web of Knowledge, Scopus, Google Scholar, and LILACs were searched from January 2000 to June 2014 to identify all peer-reviewed articles potentially relevant to the review. Methodological shortcomings were highlighted and the quality of the studies was ranked using the Cochrane Tool for Risk of Bias Assessment. Results: : Eleven relevant articles were selected (two Randomized Clinical Trials (RCT), five prospective non-randomized, four retrospective non-randomized), and the risk of bias was moderate for six studies and unclear for the others. The amount of mean intrusion reported was 0.72 mm. Extrusion was the most difficult movement to control (30% of accuracy), followed by rotation. Upper molar distalization revealed the highest predictability (88%) when a bodily movement of at least 1.5 mm was prescribed. A decrease of the Little's Index (mandibular arch: 5 mm; maxillary arch: 4 mm) was observed in aligning arches. Conclusions: : CAT aligns and levels the arches; it is effective in controlling anterior intrusion but not anterior extrusion; it is effective in controlling posterior buccolingual inclination but not anterior buccolingual inclination; it is effective in controlling upper molar bodily movements of about 1.5 mm; and it is not effective in controlling rotation of rounded teeth in particular. However, the results of this review should be interpreted with caution because of the number, quality, and heterogeneity of the studies.

The aim of the present study was to test the hypothesis that bodily maxillary molar distalization was not achievable in aligner orthodontics. Forty lateral cephalograms obtained from 20 non-growing subjects (9 male, 11 female; average age 29.73 years) (group S), who underwent bilateral distalization of their maxillary dentition with Invisalign aligners (Align Technology, Inc., San José, CA, USA), were considered for the study. Skeletal class I or class II malocclusion and a bilateral end-to-end class II molar relationship were the main inclusion criteria. Cephalograms were taken at two time points: (T0) pretreatment and (T2) post-treatment. Treatment changes were evaluated between the time points using 39 variables by means of paired t test. The level of significance was set at P < 0.05. Reproducibility of measurements was assessed by the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). The mean treatment time was 24.3 ± 4.2 months. At the post-treatment point, the first molar moved distally 2.25 mm without significant tipping (P = 0.27) and vertical movements (P = 0.43). The second molar distalization was 2.52 mm without significant tipping (P = 0.056) and vertical movements (P = 0.25). No significant movements were detected on the lower arch. SN^GoGn and SPP^GoGn angles showed no significant differences between pre- and post-treatment cephalograms (P = 0.22 and P = 0.85, respectively). Aligner therapy in association with composite attachments and class II elastics can distalize maxillary first molars by 2.25 mm without significant tipping and vertical movements of the crown. No changes to the facial height were revealed.

Background: Clear aligner treatment (CAT) has been cited as a safe and comfortable orthodontic procedure for adult patients. However, the available evidence is scarce. Objective: To perform a systematic review of the existing literature in order to assess periodontal health during CAT. Search methods and selection criteria: Pubmed, Pubmed Central, National Library of Medicine’s Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Clinical trials, Web of Knowledge, Scopus, Google Scholar, and LILACS were searched from January 1945 to September 2014 to identify all peer-reviewed papers potentially relevant to the review. Data collection and analysis: After duplicate selection and extraction procedures, the risk of bias was assessed according to the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination criteria, and a 3-point grading system, as described by the Swedish Council on Technology Assessment in Health Care (SBU), was used to rate the methodological quality of the selected papers. A PICOS table was used for data extraction. Results: Five relevant articles were selected from the 1247 identified articles. The level of evidence was moderate for all the studies. A significant improvement of the periodontal health indexes was revealed, in particular when CAT was compared to fixed appliances. No periodontal CAT adverse effects were observed in the selected studies. Conclusions: Periodontal health indexes were significantly improved during CAT. The results of this review should be interpreted with some caution because of the number, quality, and heterogeneity of the included studies.