• Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science
• /
• v.45 no.6
• /
• pp.193-204
• /
• 2015

Purpose: With the increasing prevalence of orthodontic treatment in adults, clear aligner treatments are becoming more popular. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of orthodontic treatment on periodontal tissue and to compare orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances (FA) to clear aligner treatment (CAT) in periodontitis patients. Methods: A total of 35 patients who underwent orthodontic treatment in the Department of Periodontology were included in this study. After periodontal treatment with meticulous oral hygiene education, patients underwent treatment with FA or CAT, and this study analyzed patient outcomes depending on the treatment strategy. Clinical parameters were assessed at baseline and after orthodontic treatment, and the duration of treatment was compared between these two groups. Results: The overall plaque index, the gingival index, and probing depth improved after orthodontic treatment (P<0.01). The overall bone level also improved (P=0.045). However, the bone level changes in the FA and CAT groups were not significantly different. Significant differences were found between the FA and CAT groups in probing depth, change in probing depth, and duration of treatment (P<0.05). However, no significant differences were found between the FA and CAT groups regarding the plaque index, changes in the plaque index, the gingival index, changes in the gingival index, or changes in the alveolar bone level. The percentage of females in the CAT group (88%) was significantly greater than in the FA group (37%) (P<0.01). Conclusions: After orthodontic treatment, clinical parameters were improved in the FA and CAT groups with meticulous oral hygiene education and plaque control. Regarding plaque index and gingival index, no significant differences were found between these two groups. We suggest that combined periodontal and orthodontic treatment can improve patients' periodontal health irrespective of orthodontic techniques.

• The korean journal of orthodontics
• /
• v.51 no.2
• /
• pp.115-125
• /
• 2021

Objective: To evaluate the reasons influencing the preferences for a certain type of orthodontic appliance over another among prospective patients (PP) and orthodontists. Methods: A total of 49 PP and 51 orthodontists were asked about their preferences for the following appliances: clear aligners (CA), lingual metallic brackets (LMB), polycrystalline and monocrystalline ceramic brackets, and buccal metallic brackets (BMB). The participants rated the importance of 17 potential reasons that would explain their choices. The reasons that contributed most to these preferences were identified. Non-parametric tests (Fisher's exact, χ2 and Mann-Whitney tests) and multivariate analyses (regression and discriminant analysis) were used to assess the data (α = 0.05). Results: CA and BMB were the most chosen appliances by PP and orthodontists, respectively. LMB was the most rejected option among both groups of participants (p < 0.001). Rates of the importance of pain/discomfort, smile esthetics, finishing details, and feeding/speech impairment showed the highest differences between PP and orthodontists (p < 0.0005). Discriminant analyses showed that individuals who considered treatment time and smile esthetics as more important were more likely to prefer CA, while those who prioritized finishing details and cost were more likely to choose BMB (p < 0.05). Conclusions: Reasons related to comfort and quality of life during use were considered as more important by PP, while those related to the results and clinical performance of the appliances were considered as more relevant by orthodontists.

• Journal of Periodontal and Implant Science
• /
• v.51 no.3
• /
• pp.163-178
• /
• 2021

Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate clinical factors affecting the longevity of fixed retainers and the influence of fixed retainers on periodontal health in periodontitis patients. Methods: In total, 52 patients with at least 2 years of follow-up after periodontal and orthodontic treatment were included in this study. After scaling and root planing, orthodontic treatment with fixed appliances or clear aligners was performed. Fixed retainers with twist-flex stainless steel wires were bonded to the palatal or lingual sides of anterior teeth. Changes in clinical parameters, including the plaque index, gingival index, calculus index (CI), probing pocket depth, and radiographic bone levels, were evaluated before bonding of fixed retainers and at a 12-month follow-up. Cumulative survival rates (CSRs) for retainer failure were evaluated according to sex, site, CI, stage of periodontitis, and the severity of the irregularity with the log-rank test and hazard ratios (HRs). Results: Twelve months after bonding of fixed retainers, improvements were observed in all clinical parameters except CI and radiographic bone gain. The overall CSR of the retainers with a CI <1 at the 12-month follow-up after bonding of fixed retainers was significantly higher than that of the retainers with a CI ≥1 at the 12-month follow-up (log-rank test; P<0.001). Patients with stage III (grade B or C) periodontitis had a higher multivariate HR for retainer failure (5.4; 95% confidence interval, 1.22-23.91; P=0.026) than patients with stage I (grade A or B) periodontitis. Conclusions: Although fixed retainers were bonded in periodontitis patients, periodontal health was well maintained if supportive periodontal treatment with repeated oral hygiene education was provided. Nonetheless, fixed retainer failure occurred more frequently in patients who had stage III (grade B or C) periodontitis or a CI ≥1 at 12-month follow-up after bonding of fixed retainers.

• The korean journal of orthodontics
• /
• v.52 no.4
• /
• pp.268-277
• /
• 2022

Objective: Poor experience with Invisalign treatment affects patient compliance and, thus, treatment outcome. Knowing the potential discomfort level in advance can help orthodontists better prepare the patient to overcome the difficult stage. This study aimed to construct artificial neural networks (ANNs) to predict patient experience in the early stages of Invisalign treatment. Methods: In total, 196 patients were enrolled. Data collection included questionnaires on pain, anxiety, and quality of life (QoL). A four-layer fully connected multilayer perception with three backpropagations was constructed to predict patient experience of the treatment. The input data comprised 17 clinical features. The partial derivative method was used to calculate the relative contributions of each input in the ANNs. Results: The predictive success rates for pain, anxiety, and QoL were 87.7%, 93.4%, and 92.4%, respectively. ANNs for predicting pain, anxiety, and QoL yielded areas under the curve of 0.963, 0.992, and 0.982, respectively. The number of teeth with lingual attachments was the most important factor affecting the outcome of negative experience, followed by the number of lingual buttons and upper incisors with attachments. Conclusions: The constructed ANNs in this preliminary study show good accuracy in predicting patient experience (i.e., pain, anxiety, and QoL) of Invisalign treatment. Artificial intelligence system developed for predicting patient comfort has potential for clinical application to enhance patient compliance.