Assessment of orthodontic treatment efficacy of Clarity Aligners using the Peer Assessment Rating index and the American Board of Orthodontics Cast-Radiograph Evaluation.

INTRODUCTION: 3M Oral Care Solutions (St Paul, Minn) has recently introduced Clarity Aligners into the market. This cohort study evaluated the orthodontic treatment efficacy of this clear aligner system using the Peer Assessment Rating (PAR) index and the American Board of Orthodontics Cast-Radiograph Evaluation (CR-Eval). METHODS: Pretreatment and posttreatment dental models of 87 subjects who had undergone orthodontic treatment using Clarity Aligners in both arches to align their teeth to a target setup were independently evaluated by 4 examiners using the PAR index and the American Board of Orthodontics CR-Eval. Changes in CR-Eval and PAR scores from pretreatment to posttreatment were calculated, with PAR score reductions also expressed as percentages. RESULTS: Treatment with Clarity Aligners reduced the CR-Eval scores from 39.05 ± 14.98 to 30.34 ± 8.76, resulting in a statistically significant difference of 8.76 ± 11.45 between pretreatment and posttreatment scores. Similarly, aligner treatment reduced the weighted PAR scores from 13.40 ± 9.26 to 5.80 ± 4.84, resulting in a statistically significant difference of 7.50 ± 7.56 between pretreatment and posttreatment scores. The overall median PAR reduction was 53%, with 94% of the subjects having reduced PAR scores after treatment. Seventy-eight percent of subjects had >30% PAR reduction, 57% had >50% PAR reduction, and 33% had >70% PAR reduction. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that Clarity Aligners may be an effective treatment modality in mild to moderate malocclusions.

Radiographic Evaluation of Permanent Second Molar Substitution After Extraction of Permanent First Molar: Identifying Predictors for Spontaneous Space Closure.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate pre-extraction variables associated with spontaneous space closure of the perma- nent second molar (PSM) following early extraction of the permanent first molar (PFM), and test an existing prediction model for the mandibular arch as the rates of spontaneous space closure are significantly lower in the mandible compared to the maxilla. METHODS: Pre-extraction panoramic radiographs of 162 patients (138 maxillary and 168 mandibular quadrants) between five and 15 years old at the time of PFM extraction were evaluated. The prediction model was applied to the mandibular quadrants. Postextraction radiographic evaluation was used for outcome assessment, with success defined as the presence of a visible contact between the second premolar and PSM without marginal ridge discrepancy. RESULTS: Success was observed in 82 percent of maxillary quadrants and 51 percent of mandibular quadrants. Maxillary PFM extraction between eight and 10 years or PSM Demirjian stage D or E demonstrated over 90 percent predictive probability for success. Mandibular PFM extraction at age eight years or PSM Demirjian stage D demonstrated 80 percent success. The prediction model did not add a more predictive value than chronological age or PSM Demirjian stage. CONCLUSIONS: The prediction model was not validated in this study population. Chronological age and permanent second molar developmental stage were the primary predictors for successful substitution with the permanent second molar.