ArticleThe Angle orthodontist2026
Clear aligners for Class II correction in growing patients: elastics vs mandibular advancement.
Article in The Angle orthodontist, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: To evaluate the skeletal and dental effects of Class II correction in growing patients using clear aligners, with either elastics or mandibular advancement (MA). Materials and Methods: The study included 66 growing Class II patients: 45 patients treated with clear aligners (20 using Class II elastics and 25 with MA) and 21 untreated controls observed over a comparable time period. Nine cephalometric and three study cast measurements were evaluated initially (T1) and the end of treatment (T2) to assess skeletal and dental changes. Results: The control group maintained a Class II molar relationship and overjet, whereas both treatment groups corrected to Class I. In the MA group, statistically significant skeletal changes from T1 to T2 were observed, including reduction in SNA (-1.09°) and ANB (-1.69°), in addition to dentoalveolar Class II correction. The elastic group showed no statistically significant changes in SNA and ANB compared to the control group. Linear regression revealed 5.28° of lower incisor proclination with Class II elastics, whereas lower incisor inclination was maintained with MA treatment. Conclusions: Clear aligner treatment with Class II elastics and MA were effective for correcting Class II malocclusion in growing patients that would have otherwise been maintained without intervention. Although Class II correction was mainly due to dentoalveolar changes, a skeletal component was observed with MA treatment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.