Predictability of Sequential Distalization of the Upper Arch Using Invisalign®: A 3D Superimposition Study

Background: Sequential distalization of the upper arch with clear aligners is widely used to correct Class II malocclusion, but its predictability across molars, canines, and incisors is unclear. This study compared virtual planning with intraoral outcomes and identified the associated side effects. Methods: A retrospective study analyzed 80 maxillary quadrants from 40 patients with dental Class II malocclusion treated with Invisalign® (Smart Track® material) using a sequential V-pattern distalization protocol with Class II elastics and vertical rectangular/optimized attachments. Predicted movements were extracted from ClinCheck Pro®. Scans at baseline and after the first approved aligner stage were superimposed on the palatal rugae using Geomagic Control X®. Extrusion/intrusion, buccolingual movement, mesiodistal translation, rotation, angulation, and torque were measured for molars, canines, and incisors. Results: Molar distalization reached 1.80 of the 2.60 mm planned (69.2%), and canines 1.12 of 2.45 mm (45.7%) and incisor intrusion reached only 0.03 of the 1.45 mm planned (2.1%). Buccolingual molar movement was most predictable (97.4%), and molar rotation showed moderate-to-good predictability (88.4%); incisor rotation, angulation and torque accuracy were 62.2%, 53.8% and 23.2%, respectively. Molar angulation and torque were markedly overexpressed, with unplanned intrusion of 0.80 mm; canine angulation/torque were similarly overexpressed. Incisor intrusion/torque movements were least predictable. Conclusions: Predictability of sequential upper-arch distalization varied widely across tooth groups and movement types. Linear distalization was moderately to poorly predictable and rotational movements were well reproduced, but angulation/torque control were the least predictable, especially for molars and canines, with unintended molar intrusion and buccal torque. Incisor torque, intrusion, and retrusion were most underexpressed. Vertical rectangular attachments improved molar tipping control, while absent attachments and Power Ridges worsened incisor torque/translation. Clinicians should anticipate overcorrection and refinement stages to avoid false expectations based on the initial ClinCheck outcome.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Dentistry Journal
Published
2026-09-16
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/dj14090601
Primary Topic
Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
article

Predictability of Sequential Distalization of the Upper Arch Using Invisalign®: A 3D Superimposition Study

María Luisa Menéndez López‐Mateos, Mario Menéndez‐Núñez, José Antonio Alarcón, Conchita Martín et al.
Dentistry Journal
Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
article

Predictability of Sequential Distalization of the Upper Arch Using Invisalign®: A 3D Superimposition Study

María Luisa Menéndez López‐Mateos, Mario Menéndez‐Núñez, José Antonio Alarcón, Conchita Martín, Cristina Menéndez López-Mateos
article en

Abstract

Background: Sequential distalization of the upper arch with clear aligners is widely used to correct Class II malocclusion, but its predictability across molars, canines, and incisors is unclear. This study compared virtual planning with intraoral outcomes and identified the associated side effects. Methods: A retrospective study analyzed 80 maxillary quadrants from 40 patients with dental Class II malocclusion treated with Invisalign® (Smart Track® material) using a sequential V-pattern distalization protocol with Class II elastics and vertical rectangular/optimized attachments. Predicted movements were extracted from ClinCheck Pro®. Scans at baseline and after the first approved aligner stage were superimposed on the palatal rugae using Geomagic Control X®. Extrusion/intrusion, buccolingual movement, mesiodistal translation, rotation, angulation, and torque were measured for molars, canines, and incisors. Results: Molar distalization reached 1.80 of the 2.60 mm planned (69.2%), and canines 1.12 of 2.45 mm (45.7%) and incisor intrusion reached only 0.03 of the 1.45 mm planned (2.1%). Buccolingual molar movement was most predictable (97.4%), and molar rotation showed moderate-to-good predictability (88.4%); incisor rotation, angulation and torque accuracy were 62.2%, 53.8% and 23.2%, respectively. Molar angulation and torque were markedly overexpressed, with unplanned intrusion of 0.80 mm; canine angulation/torque were similarly overexpressed. Incisor intrusion/torque movements were least predictable. Conclusions: Predictability of sequential upper-arch distalization varied widely across tooth groups and movement types. Linear distalization was moderately to poorly predictable and rotational movements were well reproduced, but angulation/torque control were the least predictable, especially for molars and canines, with unintended molar intrusion and buccal torque. Incisor torque, intrusion, and retrusion were most underexpressed. Vertical rectangular attachments improved molar tipping control, while absent attachments and Power Ridges worsened incisor torque/translation. Clinicians should anticipate overcorrection and refinement stages to avoid false expectations based on the initial ClinCheck outcome.

Dentistry JournalVol. 14(9)
Universidad Complutense de Madrid (ES), Universidad de Granada (ES)
Sustainable cities and communities
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.