Accuracy of Curve of Wilson Levelling and Posterior Tooth Inclination With Vestibular, Lingual Straight Wire Technique and Clear Aligners: A Retrospective Cohort Study.
{"title":"Accuracy of Curve of Wilson Levelling and Posterior Tooth Inclination With Vestibular, Lingual Straight Wire Technique and Clear Aligners: A Retrospective Cohort Study.","authors":"Francesca Cremonini, Rosita Tauro, Carlotta Preite, Enrico Albertini, Mario Palone, Luca Lombardo","doi":"10.1111/ocr.70165","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the discrepancy between programmed and achieved posterior tooth inclination and to assess the accuracy of Curve of Wilson levelling and posterior tooth inclination in the mandibular arch across three different techniques: vestibular fixed appliance, lingual fixed appliance and aligners.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Seventy-five patients were retrospectively selected: 25 treated with the vestibular technique (SWM prescription), 25 treated with the lingual technique (STb), and 25 treated with F22 aligners. Intraoral scans were obtained to produce initial, planned and final models. Buccolingual crown inclination and the levelling of the COW were then assessed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A significant discrepancy between programmed and achieved posterior tooth inclination was observed across all techniques (p < 0.001), indicating incomplete expression of the programmed movement. Accuracy values for inclination ranged from 85% to 90% at the first and second premolars, with no statistically significant differences among techniques. At the molar level, vestibular and lingual techniques showed significantly higher accuracy than aligners, while second molars exhibited lower accuracy values across all techniques. Regarding COW levelling, the only significant difference was observed between the vestibular (89.3% ± 4.15%) and lingual (84.67% ± 7.36%) techniques.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>All techniques resulted in a reduction of posterior tooth inclination and a certain degree of COW levelling. However, a discrepancy between planned and achieved posterior tooth inclination was observed, indicating incomplete expression of the programmed movement. Differences among techniques emerged mainly at the molar level, where vestibular appliances showed the highest accuracy, whereas the lingual technique showed lower values for COW levelling.</p>","PeriodicalId":19652,"journal":{"name":"Orthodontics & Craniofacial Research","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2026-07-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Orthodontics & Craniofacial Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ocr.70165","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the discrepancy between programmed and achieved posterior tooth inclination and to assess the accuracy of Curve of Wilson levelling and posterior tooth inclination in the mandibular arch across three different techniques: vestibular fixed appliance, lingual fixed appliance and aligners.
Materials and methods: Seventy-five patients were retrospectively selected: 25 treated with the vestibular technique (SWM prescription), 25 treated with the lingual technique (STb), and 25 treated with F22 aligners. Intraoral scans were obtained to produce initial, planned and final models. Buccolingual crown inclination and the levelling of the COW were then assessed.
Results: A significant discrepancy between programmed and achieved posterior tooth inclination was observed across all techniques (p < 0.001), indicating incomplete expression of the programmed movement. Accuracy values for inclination ranged from 85% to 90% at the first and second premolars, with no statistically significant differences among techniques. At the molar level, vestibular and lingual techniques showed significantly higher accuracy than aligners, while second molars exhibited lower accuracy values across all techniques. Regarding COW levelling, the only significant difference was observed between the vestibular (89.3% ± 4.15%) and lingual (84.67% ± 7.36%) techniques.
Conclusions: All techniques resulted in a reduction of posterior tooth inclination and a certain degree of COW levelling. However, a discrepancy between planned and achieved posterior tooth inclination was observed, indicating incomplete expression of the programmed movement. Differences among techniques emerged mainly at the molar level, where vestibular appliances showed the highest accuracy, whereas the lingual technique showed lower values for COW levelling.
期刊介绍:
Orthodontics & Craniofacial Research - Genes, Growth and Development is published to serve its readers as an international forum for the presentation and critical discussion of issues pertinent to the advancement of the specialty of orthodontics and the evidence-based knowledge of craniofacial growth and development. This forum is based on scientifically supported information, but also includes minority and conflicting opinions.
The objective of the journal is to facilitate effective communication between the research community and practicing clinicians. Original papers of high scientific quality that report the findings of clinical trials, clinical epidemiology, and novel therapeutic or diagnostic approaches are appropriate submissions. Similarly, we welcome papers in genetics, developmental biology, syndromology, surgery, speech and hearing, and other biomedical disciplines related to clinical orthodontics and normal and abnormal craniofacial growth and development. In addition to original and basic research, the journal publishes concise reviews, case reports of substantial value, invited essays, letters, and announcements.
The journal is published quarterly. The review of submitted papers will be coordinated by the editor and members of the editorial board. It is policy to review manuscripts within 3 to 4 weeks of receipt and to publish within 3 to 6 months of acceptance.