Skip to main content

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