Comparative biomechanical analysis of four different tooth- and bone-borne frog appliances for molar distalization : A three-dimensional finite element study.
{"title":"Comparative biomechanical analysis of four different tooth- and bone-borne frog appliances for molar distalization : A three-dimensional finite element study.","authors":"Xing-Yue Wang, Dou Li, Xin-Ran Xu, Jia-Rong Liu, Waseem Saleh Al-Gumaei, Hui Xue, Xiao-Ming Wang","doi":"10.1007/s00056-024-00535-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The purpose of this study was to analyze the biomechanical effects of four different designs of frog appliances for molar distalization using finite element analysis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A three-dimensional finite element model including complete dentition, periodontal ligament, palatine, and alveolar bone was established. Four types of frog appliances were designed to simulate maxillary molar distalization: tooth-button-borne (Type A), bone-borne (Type B), bone-button-borne (Type C), and tooth-bone-borne (Type D) frog appliances. A force of 10 N was applied simulating a screw in the anteroposterior direction. To assess the von Mises stress distribution and the resultant displacements in the teeth and periodontal tissues, geometric nonlinear theory was utilized.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Compared to the conventional tooth-borne frog appliance (Type A), the bone-borne frog appliances showed increased first molar distalization with enhanced mesiolingual rotation and distal tipping, but the labial inclination and intrusion of the incisors were insignificant. When replacing the palatal acrylic button with miniscrews (Types B and D), more anchorage forces were transmitted from the first premolar to palatine bone, which was further dispersed by the assistance of a palatal acrylic button (Type C).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Compared to tooth-borne frog appliances, the bone-borne variants demonstrated a clear advantage for en masse molar distalization. The combined anchorage system utilizing palatal acrylic buttons and miniscrews (Type C) offers the most efficient stress distribution, minimizing force concentration on the palatine bone.</p>","PeriodicalId":54776,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics-Fortschritte Der Kieferorthopadie","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics-Fortschritte Der Kieferorthopadie","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00056-024-00535-0","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to analyze the biomechanical effects of four different designs of frog appliances for molar distalization using finite element analysis.
Methods: A three-dimensional finite element model including complete dentition, periodontal ligament, palatine, and alveolar bone was established. Four types of frog appliances were designed to simulate maxillary molar distalization: tooth-button-borne (Type A), bone-borne (Type B), bone-button-borne (Type C), and tooth-bone-borne (Type D) frog appliances. A force of 10 N was applied simulating a screw in the anteroposterior direction. To assess the von Mises stress distribution and the resultant displacements in the teeth and periodontal tissues, geometric nonlinear theory was utilized.
Results: Compared to the conventional tooth-borne frog appliance (Type A), the bone-borne frog appliances showed increased first molar distalization with enhanced mesiolingual rotation and distal tipping, but the labial inclination and intrusion of the incisors were insignificant. When replacing the palatal acrylic button with miniscrews (Types B and D), more anchorage forces were transmitted from the first premolar to palatine bone, which was further dispersed by the assistance of a palatal acrylic button (Type C).
Conclusions: Compared to tooth-borne frog appliances, the bone-borne variants demonstrated a clear advantage for en masse molar distalization. The combined anchorage system utilizing palatal acrylic buttons and miniscrews (Type C) offers the most efficient stress distribution, minimizing force concentration on the palatine bone.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics provides orthodontists and dentists who are also actively interested in orthodontics, whether in university clinics or private practice, with highly authoritative and up-to-date information based on experimental and clinical research. The journal is one of the leading publications for the promulgation of the results of original work both in the areas of scientific and clinical orthodontics and related areas. All articles undergo peer review before publication. The German Society of Orthodontics (DGKFO) also publishes in the journal important communications, statements and announcements.