The effect of low intensity pulsed ultrasound (LIPUS) on orthodontic tooth movement: a preliminary study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
INTRODUCTION Low-Intensity Pulsed Ultrasound (LIPUS) has been introduced as a promising adjunct in orthodontic care, with growing evidence suggesting it may accelerate tooth movement, reduce unwanted side effects of orthodontic treatment (specifically orthodontically induced tooth root resorption [OITRR]), and potentially can enhance bone remodeling. LIPUS delivers mechanical stimulation to periodontal tissues, which has been shown to increase cellular activity and promote localized bone metabolism. These biological effects make LIPUS a potential, non-invasive option for improving orthodontic outcomes. This study evaluated the clinical effects of daily LIPUS application, delivered by the LIPUS Aevo System™ (SmileSonica, Inc., Edmonton, AB, Canada), a home-based medical device on OITRR, bone density and treatment duration in patients treated with clear aligners. METHODS This prospective and retrospective hybrid study included participants who are treated orthodontically using Invisalign ™ system. Participants were divided into three groups: a control group (Invisalign only), a 10-minute LIPUS- treated group, and a 15-minute LIPUS- treated group. All patients were treated at a private orthodontic clinic in Edmonton, Alberta. Participants in the LIPUS-treated groups used the Aevo System device daily during treatment, with usage monitored digitally through a mobile application. A minimum usage (adherence to the protocol [instructions]) rate of 67% was required for inclusion in the final analysis. Root resorption was assessed using before and after treatment cone-beam computed tomographic radiographs (CBCT) scans, measuring the distance from the pulp horn to the root apex of anterior maxillary teeth in standardized sagittal views. Bone density was assessed in the maxillary and mandibular regions by analyzing standardized axial slices at five specific sites, measuring the average Hounsfield units represented in grayscale values. The degree of dental crowding was quantified using Little’s Irregularity Index, measured on mandibular casts before and after treatment. Statistical analysis was performed using one-way ANOVA for between-group comparisons and repeated measures ANOVA for within-subject bone density changes. RESULTS A total of 15 participants were included in the final analysis. Root resorption was significantly lower in both LIPUS groups compared to controls, with the 15-minute group showing the least resorption (p = 0.001). Maxillary bone density showed a general increase in the LIPUS groups, while the control group showed decreased bone density; however, these differences were not statistically significant (p = 0.7). Mandibular bone density decreased in all groups, though the reduction was more pronounced in the control group (p = 0.5). All groups showed a reduction in anterior crowding, as measured by Little’s Index, but there were no significant differences between groups. CONCLUSION Within the limitations of this study, the use of LIPUS as an adjunct to clear aligner therapy was associated with a significant reduction in root resorption and favorable trends in maxillary bone density. These results suggest a potential protective effect of LIPUS on dental and periodontal structures during orthodontic treatment. While improvements in bone density and alignment were not statistically significant, the biological trends observed support further investigation. LIPUS may represent a valuable, patient-friendly addition to aligner-based orthodontics, particularly in reducing treatment side effects. More extensive, long-duration studies are needed to validate these initial results and fully assess the clinical benefits of daily LIPUS use. Also, furhter studies with larger size are recommended to support this study results or otherwise recommend other results compared to this study results.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».