Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences · 2025
Comparison of Aligners and Braces in Angle's Class III Malocclusion Cases: A Clinical Study.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Panda Biswajit, Chaudhari Dipak V, Nagella Sai Prannoy, Kudagi Vishal, Aby Deaby Miriam, Datla Praveen Kumar Varma, Syed Afroz Kalmee
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Angle's Class III malocclusion, characterized by mandibular prognathism and anterior crossbite, presents significant functional and esthetic concerns. Traditionally, fixed braces have been the standard treatment, while clear aligners offer an esthetic and comfortable alternative. The effectiveness of these two modalities in Class III correction remains debated.
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare clinical outcomes, treatment efficiency, patient compliance, and post-treatment stability of clear aligners versus fixed braces in Angle's Class III malocclusion cases.
METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted on 50 patients with mild to moderate Class III malocclusion, divided into two groups: aligners (n = 25) and braces (n = 25). Pre- and post-treatment lateral cephalograms and dental models were analyzed to evaluate treatment duration, overjet correction, skeletal changes (ANB angle), patient compliance, and post-treatment stability. Statistical analysis was performed using t-tests to compare outcomes.
RESULTS: Aligners showed shorter treatment duration (18 ± 3 months vs 22 ± 4 months, P < 0.05) and higher patient compliance (92% vs 75%, P < 0.05) than braces. However, braces resulted in superior skeletal changes (ANB improvement: 1.5° vs 0.8°, P < 0.05). Overjet correction was comparable (3.2 mm vs 3.8 mm, P > 0.05). Aligner patients had a higher need for refinements (10% vs 5%).
CONCLUSION: Clear aligners are effective for dental correction in mild to moderate Class III cases, with better compliance and shorter treatment times. However, fixed braces remain superior in skeletal modifications, making them the preferred choice for more severe cases.
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare clinical outcomes, treatment efficiency, patient compliance, and post-treatment stability of clear aligners versus fixed braces in Angle's Class III malocclusion cases.
METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted on 50 patients with mild to moderate Class III malocclusion, divided into two groups: aligners (n = 25) and braces (n = 25). Pre- and post-treatment lateral cephalograms and dental models were analyzed to evaluate treatment duration, overjet correction, skeletal changes (ANB angle), patient compliance, and post-treatment stability. Statistical analysis was performed using t-tests to compare outcomes.
RESULTS: Aligners showed shorter treatment duration (18 ± 3 months vs 22 ± 4 months, P < 0.05) and higher patient compliance (92% vs 75%, P < 0.05) than braces. However, braces resulted in superior skeletal changes (ANB improvement: 1.5° vs 0.8°, P < 0.05). Overjet correction was comparable (3.2 mm vs 3.8 mm, P > 0.05). Aligner patients had a higher need for refinements (10% vs 5%).
CONCLUSION: Clear aligners are effective for dental correction in mild to moderate Class III cases, with better compliance and shorter treatment times. However, fixed braces remain superior in skeletal modifications, making them the preferred choice for more severe cases.