Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 5 Characteristics, treatment plans, and Invisalign® recommendations

From: Recommendations for clear aligner therapy using digital or plaster study casts

Category Case no. Main characteristics Times surgery recommended (%) Times extraction recommended (%) Times aligners not recommended (%) Main reasons for not recommending aligners (times mentioned)
Class I 1-1 Moderate crowding, protrusive profile 0 15 (94%) 14 (88%) Extraction case (10)
1-2 Moderate crowding, Mx right lateral crossbite Straight profile 0 3 (19%) 6 (38%) Extraction case (2) Crossbite (2)
2-1 Moderate to severe crowding; High canine 0 12 (75%) 13 (81%) Extraction case (7) Rotation (3)
2-2 Moderate to severe crowding, Mx laterals in crossbite 0 14 (88%) 14 (88%) Extraction case (9) Difficult case (2)
3-1 Adult Severe crowding Bilateral posterior crossbite 2 (12%) 12 (75%) 15 (94%) Extraction case (6) Difficult case (3) Surgery case (2) Crossbite (2)
3-2* Adult Unilateral posterior crossbite, severely proclined upper incisors, class II 8 (50%) 13 (81%) 15 (94%) Extraction case (6) Surgery case (5) Difficult case (2)
4-1 Anterior open bite, facial asymmetry 7 (44%) 9 (56%) 14 (88%) Surgery case (6) Extraction case (3) Anchorage (2) Open bite (2)
4-2 Anterior open bite Mild crowding, protrusive lips 1 (6%) 15 (94%) 14 (88%) Extraction case (7) Surgery case (2) Difficult case (2) Open bite (2)
Class II Div 1 5-1 Moderate crowding 0 13 (81%) 14 (88%) Extraction case (11)
5-2 Moderate crowding 1 (6%) 15 (94%) 14 (88%) Extraction case (6) Difficult case (2) Surgery case (2) Anchorage (2)
6-1 Deepbite Full-cusp class II Retrognathic mandible 8 (50%) 11 (69%) 13 (81%) Surgery case (5) Extraction case (4) Difficult case (2) Anchorage (2)
6–2 Deepbite Half-cusp class II; 1 (6%) 2 (12%) 9 (56%) Deepbite and deep COS (3) Extraction case (2) (9 suggested functional appliances)
Class II Div 2 7-1 Deepbite, maxillary moderate crowding 1 (6%) 4 (25%) 7 (44%) Extraction case (2) (3 suggested functional appliances)
7-2 Deepbite 2 (12%) 0 12 (75%) AP correction (5) (10 suggested functional appliances)
8-1 Adult Deepbite 8 (50%) 3 (19%) 9 (56%) Surgery case (3) Extraction case (3)
8-2 Adult Severe crowding 3 (19%) 13 (81%) 14 (88%) Extraction case (7) Surgery case (3) Difficult case (2) Anchorage (2)
Class III 9-1 Mild A-P discrepancy Asymmetry 12 (75%) 1 (6%) 9 (56%) Surgery case (6) AP correction (2)
9-2 Mild A-P discrepancy Asymmetry 2 (12%) 0 8 (50%) Severity (3) AP correction (3)
10-1 Anterior crossbite, severe A-P discrepancy Asymmetry 10 (63%) 4 (25%) 15 (94%) Surgery case (7) Difficult case (4) Anchorage (2)
10-2 Anterior crossbite, severe A-P discrepancy Asymmetry 13 (81%) 3 (19%) 15 (94%) Surgery case (10) Deepbite or deep COS (2)
  1. *This patient had a Class II posterior malocclusion